Broad Street Hockey: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Week One: Previews and Predictions for all 15 games

How LTIR Affects the Salary Cap


I think there is great misunderstanding about how Long Term Injured Reserve works.  Certain internet jackasses recently proved this point.  Just yesterday I realized I was totally wrong about the mechanics of it, so I'm going to try to share this knowledge as succinctly as possible.

Star-divide

I  LTIR Rules and Regulations

 

All references are from the NHL CBA on page 227.  This is Page 245 of the NHL CBA .pdf file which is found here, courtesy of the NHLPA.

Okay, Simon Gagne breaks his leg.  What happens now?

 

50.10 Player Injuries, Illnesses, Suspensions.

(a) All Player Salary and Bonuses paid to Players on an NHL Active Roster, Injured Reserve or Non Roster that are Unfit to Play - being either injured or suffering from an illness - shall be counted against a Club's Upper Limit, Actual Club Salary and Averaged Club Salary....

 

In simple terms, the NHL doesn't care if Gagne's leg fell off, until he retires his salary counts against the Cap.

However, the NHL isn't going to punish a team for having their player's leg fall off.

 

50.10 (d)

Bona-Fide Long-Term Injury/Illness Exception to the Upper Limit

Three paragraphs later the CBA explains the exception to the Cap for some players who are incapacitated.

The first requirement for Gagne to meet the conditions under Paragraph D requires that Gagne become injured to the extent that

...the Club's physician believes*... that the Player, owing to either an injury or an illness, will be unfit to play for at least (i) twenty-four (24) calendar days, and (ii) ten (10) NHL Regular Season games...


Okay, so we've got Gagne and his broken leg.  The CBA tells us in 50.10(a) that his salary still counts against the cap.  Now in 50.10(d) it tells us there is relief, but only if Gagne will be unavailable for BOTH 24 days and 10 games.


His broken leg means he'll miss that time.  What other conditions are there?

[picking up right where the last block left off, with "ten (10) NHL Regular Season games"] and such Club desires to replace such player

So the relief only exists when the team wants to replace the player who is unavailable for at least 24 days and 10 games.


What is the relief?

the Club may add an additional Player or Players [a team can replace with multiple players if it previously had extra roster space, in addition to Player X]  to its Active Roster, and the replacement Player Salary... may increase the Club's Averaged Club Salary to an amount up to and exceeding the Upper Limit [restricted by the conditions below].

Okay, makes perfect sense:  Gagne got hurt and can't play for a month?  You can replace him with Player X.


But here's the first major point of confusion, which will later lead to a bigger point:  Gagne's salary is still counted against the Cap, but Player X's salary can put the team over the cap.

So what are the conditions?

50.10(d)

(i) [The team has to notify the NHL in writing that they intend to use this exception before they can do it].

Simple enough, the team can't wait for the NHL to call and tell them they're over the cap, they've got to notify the NHL of what they are doing.

(ii) The Player Salary and Bonuses of the Player that has been deemed unfit-to-play shall continue to be counted towards the Club's Averaged Club Salary...

This is actually redundant, it merely reiterates 50.10(a).

(iii) The total Replacement Player Salary and Bonuses for a Player or Players that have replaced an unfit-to-play Player may not in the aggregate exceed the amount of the Player Salary and Bonuses of the unfit-to-play Player who the Club is replacing.

So, wherever we're going here, we can't put Darryl Powe on LTIR, then trade for Michael Nylander, and say "Replacement Player, it's all cool!"

(iv) The [Replacement Player's cap hit] may be added to the Club's Averaged Club Salary until such time as the Club... reaches the Upper Limit.  A Club may then exceed the Upper Limit due to the addition of replacement Player Salary... provided... that

What's the catch?

... when the unfit-to-play Player is once again fit to play [which includes when the now healthy player goes out on a Conditioning Assignment], 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.

So, Gagne's out for a month, the Flyers can go get Michael Nylander.  But as soon as Gagne's leg heals, they've got to get back under the cap.

 

II Application

So here's the thing I was confused about:  LTIR money doesn't come off the cap, it goes over it.  But it only goes over it when necessary.

So the Flyers' cap hit today includes Simon Gagne's salary.  This is why Hockey Buzz lists the Flyers payroll as $1.2 million over the Upper Limit right now.**


What does that mean?   Well, for starters, it means there is no reason to waive Riley Cote.  If the Flyers got rid of Riley Cote, they're not actually saving salary.  Right now, the Flyers are $1.2 over the cap. Waiving Riley Cote tomorrow means they'd be $700k over the salary cap anyway.

 

When Simon Gagne gets healthy, they'll be fine because I believe Betts and Powe are qualified for LTIR.  When the three are all healthy, they'll still be okay because Emery is on LTIR with his $1.5m salary.  But if no one else is hurt, when Emery gets healthy (not when the Flyers are ready to put him back in the lineup), they would have to get under the cap by shedding $1.2mil in payroll.  Backlund should be gone as soon as Leighton gets to Philly, and that's $800k off the cap number right there, then one of the forwards to the AHL gets the Flyers under the cap.

 

III Two Interesting Notes About LTIR

These are going to be out of order from the CBA.  First, paragraph (v) tells us that LTIR can be invoked retroactively.

A Club may elect to replace a Player who is unfit to play under this [LTIR Exception] at any point during the period that he is unfit to play, and any days and games missed... prior to the election of [LTIR] shall retroactively count toward the missed [24 days and 10 games].

Second note which is particularly important given the Olympic break:

To the extent any Player who is unfit-to-play becomes fit to play during the period of the Roster Freeze... the provisions of this section... 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.

The effect this has on the Flyers is that Ray Emery will have to be dealt with before the Olympics are over.

 

* - This sentence actually reads (in the NHL CBA, a publicly available legal document which sets out the operating guidelines for a multi-billion dollar organization) "...such that the Club's physician believes, in his or her opinion, that the Player...."  Which begs the question: What if the Team Physician doesn't believe his own medical opinion?

** - It appears Hockey Buzz has removed Mike Rathje from the cap calculation.  Technically, as you can see above, the Flyers are $4.7m over the cap.  But Hockey Buzz lists Rathje in the bottom section of the page, away from the NHL Roster.

This item was written by a member of this community and is not necessarily endorsed by Broad Street Hockey.

2 recs  |  Comment 35 comments  |  Add comment |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

This is excellent. I still have three questions:

1) Don’t Gagne, Emery, Powe, and possibly Betts all satisfy the requirements for LTIR?

2) If so, who exactly were the “replacements” for each? Laliberte has been up and down. Was he a replacement for any of them?

3) Since the cap hit is calculated daily, how does that affect LTIR and how does that affect replacement players?

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 11:53 AM EST reply actions  

1) I didn’t calculate, but I believe so. However, the Flyers, logically, wouldn’t declare them in writing as LTIR until they need to. So no idea which ones are and aren’t…

2) Apparently replacements aren’t designated. I don’t know who Irish Blues is, but he says he asked the league and was told there is no specifically designated replacement players, the money just slushes around.

3) Not sure what you’re asking.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 12:07 PM EST reply actions  

Just to start, this is absolutely ridiculous. Is every league’s CBA (more specifically, the salary cap) this convoluted?

Hopefully I can ask this question better. The club’s salary is calculated daily. So, while Backlund’s cap hit is $800k, the Flyers only pay him $800,000/(number of days in the NHL season) * days he was on the roster. Therefore, his “cap hit” will be something closer to $200k than $800k, since he wasn’t on the roster long.

What this post tells me is that with Gagne, Emery, Powe, and/or Betts probably on LTIR, the Flyers are allowed to go over the cap using replacement players. But are those four players cap hits counting today (on the daily tracker) despite being on LTIR? Further, if the replacement players come up for the minimum time (10 games, 24 days), is their actual cap hit less than their season long cap hit? Similar to my Backlund example. At that point, is the team allowed to go over the cap in the amount of Backlund’s season long hit ($800k) or only his cap hit, as calculated daily (est. $200k)?

I’m sorry if it’s still not clear what I’m asking.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions  

To clarify, “$800,000/(number of days in the NHL season)” is to get his “daily cap hit.”

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 12:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Therefore, his "cap hit" will be something closer to $200k than $800k, since he wasn’t on the roster long.

It’ll be something more like $100k, mathematically, but I get the point.

And lets call that $100k his “cap effect”. So his “cap hit” will be the average value of the contract over its term, the “cap effect” will be the amount of money actually applied to the Flyers cap based on days on the roster.

But are those four players cap hits counting today (on the daily tracker) despite being on LTIR?

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. That is exactly what I didn’t realize. That’s why I have the line in there about previously thinking that LTIR contracts come “off” the cap, when if fact what they do is go “over” the cap.

Further, if the replacement players come up for the minimum time (10 games, 24 days),


Let me clarify, you may have just worded this poorly, but the minimum applies only to the amount of time the LTIR player must miss. A replacement player can be on the roster for one day and no games during that stretch.

is their actual cap hit less than their season long cap hit?

I don’t understand this question.

Once you get all of this sorted out, I’m literally going to blow your mind. But I have to wait until you catch up on the groundwork.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 12:41 PM EST up reply actions  

haha, yeah. I’m progressing a bit slowly on this one.

That’s why I have the line in there about previously thinking that LTIR contracts come "off" the cap, when if fact what they do is go "over" the cap.

I had just recently realized there was a difference between LTIR (Mike Rathje) and LTIR (Simon Gagne). But this just muddies the waters for me. Maybe there isn’t a difference, and I just mentally placed them in two separate categories, despite the fact that they are the same. I think we were in the same boat, thinking that Rathje’s goes “over” the cap since he’s not on the roster (in our minds, at the very least) while Gagne’s came “off” the cap since he was on the roster. Again, I’m assuming they are both in the same category and we both just assumed they were different.

A replacement player can be on the roster for one day and no games during that stretch.

I certainly did word that poorly. I knew the minimum was for players going on the LTIR, but I was speaking in the purely hypothetical, fantasy world of “Emery goes down for the minimum, they call up one guy and only one guy, who is on the roster only while Emery is on LTIR for the minimum amount of time.”

I think I figured out my confusion. The daily cap hit doesn’t really matter since any salary the club takes on to replace an injured player has to be the same or lower than said injured player. So, with Gagne out ($5.25 million), say the club takes on Michael Nylander ($4.875 million). They can do that so long as Gagne is hurt, but as soon as Gagne comes back they have to get rid of Nylander. And since the CBA says you can’t have the replacement player earn more than the injured player, the daily calculation doesn’t matter.

So here’s my hypothetical: if Gagne doesn’t return and this team suddenly finds itself fighting for playoff position at the end of February, they can’t go out and grab Paul Kariya ($6 mil) at the deadline, despite the fact that the Flyers would only take on about $1 mil of that salary through the daily cap hit?

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 2:17 PM EST up reply actions  

haha, yeah. I’m progressing a bit slowly on this one.

It took me a while to figure this all out, too. I just happened to start reading about it over the weekend. (I was actually trying to learn if there’s a prohibition on trading players who are on LTIR, I didn’t find one.)


I had just recently realized there was a difference between LTIR (Mike Rathje) and LTIR (Simon Gagne).

Do explain, because that’s the point I am going to bring up later.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Just to respond to this now, I at least THOUGHT there was a difference at first, but like I said later in that paragraph, it sounds like there isn’t a difference, and that people just assumed there was.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 2:41 PM EST up reply actions  

So in the second block quote I made at 2:21 (right above) that’s a typo and should read


I had just recently realized there was NOT a difference between LTIR (Mike Rathje) and LTIR (Simon Gagne).

?

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:43 PM EST up reply actions  

Yes.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 2:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Okay, we’re back on the same page then. I thought you were going to teach me something I had missed.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions  

[whoops, prematurely posted]
As far as I can tell, Gagne and Rathje are exactly the same.


I think I figured out my confusion. The daily cap hit doesn’t really matter since any salary the club takes on to replace an injured player has to be the same or lower than said injured player. So, with Gagne out ($5.25 million), say the club takes on Michael Nylander ($4.875 million). They can do that so long as Gagne is hurt, but as soon as Gagne comes back they have to get rid of Nylander. And since the CBA says you can’t have the replacement player earn more than the injured player, the daily calculation doesn’t matter.

I don’t understand the conclusion of the last sentence, but everything else is factually accurate except that the Flyers wouldn’t have to get rid of Nylander per se, they would just have to get back under the cap.

I originally wrote it as Player X and Player Y, then changed all the X’s to Gagne and Y’s to Nylander because they work so nicely.

So here’s my hypothetical: if Gagne doesn’t return and this team suddenly finds itself fighting for playoff position at the end of February, they can’t go out and grab Paul Kariya ($6 mil) at the deadline, despite the fact that the Flyers would only take on about $1 mil of that salary through the daily cap hit?

There is not enough information to answer that question.

Lets say the entire team is healthy and they have $1m in cap space. Then Gagne breaks his leg. Gagne makes $5.25m and is placed on LTIR.

Ignoring Mike Rathje, the the cap is $56.8m and we’re saying their salary is $55.8m.

If the Flyers want to acquire Paul Kariya, they can. They have to designate Gagne to LTIR. Gagne’s salary still remains against the cap. When they add Kariya, the first $1m of his salary applies to the cap.

Now, the rest of his salary puts them $5m over the cap. The NHL will acknowledge that there are multiple replacement players on the the Flyers’ roster whose salaries add up to the $5m Kariya pts them over the salary cap. This is acceptable because Gagne’s salary was more than $5m.

The Flyers now have a salary cap upper limit of $61.8m, with another half mil of LTIR cushion due to Gagne being on LTIR. As soon as Gagne is medically able to play again, their salary cap upper limit reverts back to $56.1m and they must get under that limit by 5pm that day (or midnight or whatever). This includes a day during the Olympic Roster Freeze.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Alternatively, let’s not use Kariya, let’s use Ovechkin and his $9m, I think that will clarify better. All changes will be in bold.

.
.
.

Lets say the entire team is healthy and they have $6m in cap space. Then Gagne breaks his leg. Gagne makes $5.25m and is placed on LTIR.

Ignoring Mike Rathje, the the cap is $56.8m and we’re saying their salary is $50.8m.

If the Flyers want to acquire Ovechkin, they can. They have to designate Gagne to LTIR. Gagne’s salary still remains against the cap. When they add Ovechkin, the first $6m of his salary applies to the cap.

Now, the rest of his salary puts them $3m over the cap. The NHL will acknowledge that there are multiple replacement players on the the Flyers’ roster whose salaries add up to the $3m Ovechkin puts them over the salary cap. This is acceptable because Gagne’s salary was more than $5m.

The Flyers now have a salary cap upper limit of $59.8m, with another $2.5 mil of LTIR cushion due to Gagne being on LTIR. As soon as Gagne is medically able to play again, their salary cap upper limit reverts back to $56.1m and they must get under that limit by 5pm that day (or midnight or whatever). This includes a day during the Olympic Roster Freeze.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Alright, I see now.

And they can get around this because they don’t have to designate who the replacement player is.

So my question remains: Where does the daily calculation come into play? If they acquire Ovechkin, they aren’t on the hook for his entire $9 mil since he was acquired mid-season.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions  

We’ve talked about daily calculations before, and I don’t get it.

The next step is to return to your theory from back then that the Flyers could just add Giguere at the deadline and only take a $2m hit so they could afford him. (Pre-Jones fuckup.)

Take a step back and explain the daily calculation to me.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:57 PM EST up reply actions  

Because I feel like we’ve now switched positions from the ones we held in that conversation.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 2:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Well, from my understanding of the CBA then – which is why I’m not sure how it fits into this – is that the Averaged Club Salary is determined by a daily calculation of every player on the roster. So, like we discussed above, Backlund won’t cost the Flyers $800k this year, since he wasn’t on the roster the entire season. The same applies to Syvret, Nodl, Bartulis, Kalinski, etc.

But that only applies to players who aren’t on the roster. My initial confusion regarding the Rathje and Gagne LTIR was that I assumed there was an IR similar to football (Rathje) and a DL similar to baseball. That’s not the case. So, since Gagne is on LTIR – but on the roster – his total $5.25 mil will count in it’s entirety, unless he’s traded or waived.

My understanding is that if the Flyers trade Gagne for Giguere, the league then does the following calculations:

Gagne: $5,250,000/Number of days in the NHL season * days from the start of the season to the date of the trade. Say this trade happens exactly halfway through the season, Gagne will count $2.625 mil against the Flyers season salary cap.

Giguere: $6,000,000/Number of days in the NHL season * days from the start of the season to the date of the trade. In the same situation (traded halfway through the season), Giguere will count $3 mil against the Flyers season salary cap.

So, in that situation, if the Flyers trade Gagne for Giguere exactly halfway through the season (not necessarily game 41, obviously) it will be as if they had one player equal $5.625 mil of a cap hit, as opposed to Giggy’s $6 or Gagne’s $5.25 mil.

Again, that was how I read it initially and right now I don’t have the time to re-read it, but if you could find where I said that, I think I quoted the CBA directly.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 3:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Now, how that affects the LTIR would be as follows:

Assuming the same scenario as Gags for Giggy (exactly halfway through the season), but this time Gags for Ovechkin, the Flyers would have the equivalent of one player with a season cap hit of $7,394,230.50 (Ovechkin’s $4,769,230.50 actual half season cap hit + Gag’s $2.625.)

Now, back to your initial example (saying Carter broke his leg, not Gagne) of a team with $6 million in cap space:

If the Flyers want to acquire Ovechkin, they can. They have to designate Gagne say Carter to LTIR. Carter’s salary still remains against the cap. When they add Ovechkin, the first $6m of his salary applies to the cap.

Now, the rest of his salary puts them $3m $1.39+ mil over the cap. The NHL will acknowledge that there are multiple replacement players on the the Flyers’ roster whose salaries add up to the $3m $1.39+ mil Ovechkin puts them over the salary cap. This is acceptable because Gagne’s Carter’s salary was more than $5m.

The Flyers now have a salary cap upper limit of $59.8m $58.1+ mil, with another $2.5 mil $3.6+ mil of LTIR cushion due to Carter being on LTIR. As soon as Carter is medically able to play again, their salary cap upper limit reverts back to $56.8m and they must get under that limit by 5pm that day (or midnight or whatever). This includes a day during the Olympic Roster Freeze.

But it’s that last paragraph that doesn’t make sense to me.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions  

To clarify:

I changed $3 mil to $1.39 mil, assuming you took AO’s $9 mil, minus the team’s $6 mil cap space. I took the season long cap hit of the hypothetical AO/Gagne – $7.39+ mil. So, rather than a $9 mil player in AO, you have the hybrid Simon Ovechkin.

The Flyers now have a salary cap upper limit of $58.1 mil – down from $59.8 mil – because the cap went from $56.8 million, plus AO’s salary in excess of the cap room – which was $1.39+ mil.

The $3.6 mil of LTIR cushion came from subtracting Carter’s cap hit ($5 mil) from AO’s excess ($1.39+ mil).

Again, this is what has me confused. How does calculating the cap daily actually come into play here?

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 4:15 PM EST up reply actions  

We need an accountant to answer this question.

I sort of understand, but not fully. I just don’t get the daily calculation stuff. I can only think about it in terms of season salary, and then a fraction of that.

I realize this is effectively the same thing. But it doesn’t work for my brain the way you are calculating it.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions  

haha, I fully understand. I had a hard time just doing the math.

But basically, the way you think about it is correct, it just becomes complicated once we add numbers (I’m the same way. There’s a reason we both went to law school.)

The daily cap hit IS a fraction of the season cap hit, not the salary. But basically, the payroll (and subsequent salary cap) is calculated daily, rather than in one lump sum. So for players like Richards, Carter, Giroux, Pronger, Timonen, etc. you can just look at their yearly cap hit, and say that’s what they cost their team over the season, since they won’t spend a day off the roster – either through trades or being sent down.

It gets tricky when you’re talking about guys that go back and forth, and for guys that switch teams. Which is why when you trade for a player, you don’t just add his yearly cap hit to your team’s yearly cap hit, since how much he actually costs depends on how many days he’s on your roster.

So, I’m hypothesizing that if Gagne remains on LTIR for the rest of the year, there will come a point in time where the team could acquire AO and his $9+ million salary – despite not having enough cap space – since at some point, the Flyers daily calculation of AO’s averaged salary on their roster would be less than Gagne’s $5.25 million.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 5:11 PM EST up reply actions  

Change “AO and his $9+ million salary” to “AO and his $9+ million yearly cap hit”.

I forget how important it is to be clear that “salary” and “cap hit” and NOT the same thing. sorry.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions  

I am occasionally guilty of the same thing. Its when I really wish we had an edit button…

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 5:20 PM EST up reply actions  

But the problem with all of that is, then, as explained but I don’t think you’ve connected…

You have to adjust the Flyers Upper Limit for these guys on LTIR.

So, for instance, even though the Flyers are currently over $56.8m. Ready for the mindfuck?

The Flyers have not actually been under a salary cap for years due to Rathje’s salary always counting against the cap. There are implications of that fact to be discussed later. But first let’s make sure you understand that.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 5:22 PM EST up reply actions  

Whoops, forgot to end a sentence:


So, for instance, even though the Flyers are currently over $56.8m they’re not over the salary cap.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions  

Oh, certainly. That I get.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 6:15 PM EST up reply actions  

interesting loophole – well done

by fitzy first on Dec 16, 2009 12:43 PM EST reply actions  

This is why there was almost a two-year work stoppage in the NHL. Ridiculous.

That aside, great work Mario.

Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?

by mikefive on Dec 16, 2009 1:00 PM EST reply actions  

Who knew a moment of clarity could come with a migraine? Great post and conversation. Things start to fall into place now.

Will you get to the mindfuck with Rathje please? it’s been bothering me for ages why they’re doing that.

by Mike B on D on Dec 16, 2009 7:27 PM EST reply actions  

Re-reading the conversation, I’m wondering if this section:

(iii) The total Replacement Player Salary and Bonuses for a Player or Players that have replaced an unfit-to-play Player may not in the aggregate exceed the amount of the Player Salary and Bonuses of the unfit-to-play Player who the Club is replacing.

means that you can’t replace player X with player Y (if player’s Y’s yearly cap hit is larger than player X’s), even if you acquire player Y on such a date that he will actually cost less than player X due to the club’s cap hit being calculated daily.

Example: Kimmo ($6.33 mil) breaks his leg, and the Flyers go out and trade even more draft picks they don’t have to Chicago for Brian Campbell ($7.1 mil). But they make this trade exactly halfway through the season, so Campbell only costs $3.55 mil for the Flyers. Does this satisfy this section, or does “in the aggregate” mean mean calculated daily? Lastly, is there a distinction to be made between their use of salary as opposed to cap hit – a mistake we often make? This typically isn’t a problem, but with the recent trend of drastically front-loading deals now, a play may have a salary of $650k but a cap hit of $6 million.

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 8:37 PM EST reply actions  

I would assume it means on a daily basis, because after the season bonuses go back and get retroactively applied, then whatever bonuses retroactively put a team over the cap get applied to the upcoming season.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 8:40 PM EST up reply actions  

With all of that said… let’s go back to September 2007.

Rathje is on LTIR. Within a few months, Simon Gagne gets placed on LTIR for the remainder of the season.

September 2008, the Flyers had Jones, Rathje, and Parent all on LTIR. By the time Jones and Parent were back, Briere was gone.

September 2009, the Flyers have Rathje on LTIR and in October Gagne gets placed there, eventually joined by Emery.

So at just about all times since September 2007, the Flyers have had their daily calculation beyond the official salary cap number. Which means they were never ever able to bank cap space for later in the season.

This re-colors so many of the decisions that were made for the last few years that I can’t even comprehend it all.

For the present, it means that there’s no reason to take Cote off the roster unless they intend to replace him. More importantly, that half a mil we discussed yesterday which they saved by having Leighton instead of Backlund… worthless unless they acquire a player(s) that increases the team’s total cap hit.

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 8:49 PM EST reply actions  

Just to be clear: The Flyers can exceed the cap by the player’s salary while he’s on LTIR, but as soon as he comes back, that exemption is removed.

But something I think we missed (or I missed) in our earlier discussion is, say the Flyers are completely healthy and have $3 million in cap space. Gagne goes down. They team gets an LTIR cushion of $2.25 million, giving them $5.25 million of cap room (technically and temporarily) as opposed to an LTIR cushion of $5.25 million, giving them $8.25 million of cap room, right?

Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.

by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 16, 2009 10:07 PM EST up reply actions  

No. I think they would have available to them $8.25m of cap space. The $3m they actually have, and all of the LTIRed player’s salary, conceivably.

Think about how it plays out. If your LTIR player (Gagne) is out two months, you really can’t afford to add $8m in cap space because two months from now you’ll have to waive or trade away (at a discount given your predicament) more than $3m in space. If your LTIR player is done for the year, then he shouldn’t really have any effect on the cap, hence the $3m of room you already had plus his $5.25m contract (ignoring the prorating of the contract, of course).

by MarioD on Dec 16, 2009 10:53 PM EST up reply actions  

nice job again MarioD (I am willing to give you props when you do something right) this is exactly what happened with Danny last year we had to clear cap space to get Danny back in the lineup

by chrislanci on Dec 17, 2009 10:16 AM EST up reply actions  


User Tools

All the Philadelphia Flyers news and commentary that's fit to print.
Start posting about the Flyers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Carcillo_small
Should The Flyers Sign Bill Guerin?
Small
NHL 11
Samuel_l_small
How do you treat a long lost Brother?
Philadelphia_flyers_wallpaper_by_quackeration_small
Alternative hockey fantasy league
Jacketsflyers_small
When Detroit Man Attacks! Philly Edition
Philadelphia-flyers-logo_small
1996 World Cup of Hockey - what a series!
Th_captainhistory_small
Philadelphia Flyers Goal Projections for 2010/2011
Bshfezzy_small
RISK: NHL EDITION (A FHL brought to you by BSH)
Headshot-phillies_small
2010/11 BSH Fantasy Hockey Details
Carcillo_small
Solution To Long-Term Cap Issue

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Atlantic Standings

GP W L OTL PT
New Jersey 82 48 27 7 103
Pittsburgh 82 47 28 7 101
Philadelphia 82 41 35 6 88
New York Rangers 82 38 33 11 87
New York Islanders 82 34 37 11 79

(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Vancouver Canucks' Willie Mitchell, centre, reacts as Calgary Flames' Michael Cammalleri, left to right, Jarome Iginla and Olli Jokinen, of Finland, celebrate Iginla's goal during second period NHL hockey action at GM Place in Vancouver, Tuesday, April 7, 2009.  (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, Jonathan Hayward) link

Is Willie Mitchell A Socialist?

Photo +5 updates

SB Nation's Mock NHL Expansion Draft: Winnipeg And Quebec Select Their Teams

NEWARK NJ - JULY 20: General Manager Lou Lamoriello owner Jeff Vanderbeek Ilya Kovalchuk and head coach John Maclean of the New Jersey Devils speak with the media during a press conference announcing his contract renewal at the Prudential Center on July 20 2010 in Newark New Jersey.  (Photo by Bruce Bennett/Getty Images) link

Introducting 'NHL Monopoly'

More from SBNation.com >


Managing Editor

Headshot-phillies_small Travis Hughes

Staff Writers

Think_sc_cropped_small Geoff Detweiler

Me_minus_kbond_small Ben Rothenberg

D150_small Teemu H

Designer

Self_portrait_avatar_small KreiderDesigns