Previously, I analyzed 20 teams’ current list of players’ contracts against the recommended model for the Next CBA. (See “The Next CBA: Part I”, “The Next CBA: Part II”, ANA through CGY, CAR through DAL, DET through MIN, and MTL Through NYR.)
Below is analysis of OTT, PHI, PHX, PIT and SJS. This blog uses current information from www.capgeek.com to determine contractual impact of the recommended, next CBA on these teams. I assume that players being paid over the League Minimum Contract (LMC) floor of $700K are at least Non-Franchise Contract (NFC) Players, so their re-designation is not listed unless their salary must change or a special designation is required. I also assume the goal of every team would be to honor the contract awarded unless there are public rumblings to the contrary. And all changes required to meet the recommended CBA’s contracting language are discussed.
Onward Through Teams 20 - 25 of the NHL
OTT – Jason Spezza meets the requirement for the team’s FPC II. No other players meet monetary requirements for FPC I or III.
As the FPC II, Spezza will turn 32 at the end of his current, final contract year and only needs a pone year raise to the FPC II ceiling. Cap change = $40K AAV / $200K total
Milan Michalek needs a one-year exception to complete his agreement as written. Cap change = $0
Were the proposed CBA going into affect today, Sergei Gonchar – due to age – could serve one year as written, seek a one-year exception, and then would have to be released in the final year of his contract as a UFA. Cap change = -$1.833M AAV / -$5.5M total
Daniel Alfredsson is in the same boat as Gonchar. Cap change = -$1.833M AAV / -$5.5M total
Ryan Shannon and David Hale’s contracts do not meet the LMC floor and require a raise. Cap change = $100K AAV and total
And Erik Karlsson’s ELC is above the ELC maximum with bonuses and needs downward adjustment. Cap change = -$14.5K AAV / -$29K total
The Senators have a bit under average with only seven players’ contracts requiring adjustment. The overall Cap difference is -$2.021M AAV / -$10.104M total, with two players (Gonchar and Alfredsson) losing a total of two years of term
PHI – Daniel Briere and Kimmo Timonen meet the monetary requirements to both be FPC IIs. No other player meets requirements for FPC I or III.
BUT, Briere will be 33 at the start of the season so cannot be designated as an FPC. The best course of action here is to rework his contract to an NFC maximum with bonus money for three years, seek the one-year exception, and then release him as a UFA in the final year of the current term. Cap change is a -$1.625M AAV / total loss of -$6.5M. The Flyers are well within the rules to pay him the maximum in bonus monies to attempt to make up for the loss of one year’s salary. But the maximum under the rules would be approximately $2.7M short, and it is, in effect, the team paying for a year not yet played with the player not be under contract. Business-wise, it does not make sense to do more than adjust for current annual salary and NFC maximum.
Timonen is similar to Briere. He will be 36 before season’s end, so no FPC status can be granted. He also can only get one year normally, a one-year exception, and then loses one year of term. Cap change is at a -$2.111M AAV / total loss of -$6.333M with two years’ bonus money thrown in
To maintain as close to the norm of current contracts as possible, Mike Richards needs to be designated the team’s FPC III. At age 26 this season, it would give him a one-time bump to the FPC III Ceiling, plus the ability to play eight years normally, one year with an exception and a loss of the final two years of term to UFA status. Cap change is $27.8K AAV and a net loss of -$11.25M for two lost years of term
Chris Pronger will be 36 at the opening of this season so is not eligible for FPC status. He could serve one year plus a one-year extension at the NFC Maximum, and then would be released to UFA status for the final five years of his contract. While on contract for two years, his Cap change =$841K AAV / $1.682M total. Overall for lost contract years, however, he is facing -$2.084M AAV / -$22.925M total
Due to age, Ian Laperriere needs a one-year exception to serve out his current term. Cap change = $0
Jody Shelley, age 35 at mid-season this year, has similar circumstances to Timonen and would lose one year to UFA status. Cap change = -$367K AAV / -$1.1M total
Oskars Bartulis’ contract is below the LMC figure, requiring a raise. Cap change =$125K AAV / $375K total
James Van Riemsdyk’s ELC is greater than the maximum with bonuses. Cap change = -$369K AAV and a total of -$738K
The Flyers just about hit the average issues mark with eight contracts under contention per the proposed CBA. Total dollar difference is a staggering -$4.407M AAV / -$48.471M total, placing them second in overall dollars to CHI so far. They also have one more player losing term than CHI at five (the most for any one team), but less total term than the ‘Hawks at 10 years.
PHX – Ed Jovanovski meets FPC II status in terms of dollars. No other player meets FPC I or III status.
Jovanovski’s one-year term requires a bump up to the FPC II maximum. Cap change = $700K AAV and total
Derek Morris at age 32 this season, can serve one year as is plus a one-year exception and then loses two years of current SPC term. Cap change = -$1.375M AAV / -$5.5M total
At age 39 before season’s end, Ray Whitney, and age 38, Adrian Aucoin, both need a one-year exception to fulfill his current contract. Cap change = $0 AAV and total
David Schlemko does not meet the LMC minimum, so requires a raise in pay. Cap change = $175K AAV / $525K total
As you might expect from ‘The NHL’s Team’ and the hard work of Don Maloney, there are not a lot of issues in the desert. Under the average, they have only five players with issues to solve. The total Cap difference is -$1.069M AAV / -$4.275M total, something a cash-starved team can use. And one player (Derek Morris) loses two years of term per the new CBA’s rules.
PIT – Evgeni Malkin and Sidney Crosby both meet requirements for FPC I status. No players meet FPC II or III status.
There is probably little doubt when only one player can be the FPC I that Crosby would be it. Cap change = $700K AAV / $2.1M total
That would make Malkin the FPC II. Under the assumption they would want the dollar figures to remain the same, they can easily solve this with bonus money. Net Cap change = $0 over term
I would recommend Marc-Andre Fleury be designated as the FPC III to allow him to serve out his full contractual term as currently signed. He would get a one-time increase to the FPC III maximum as the only change to his current status. Cap change = $200K AAV / $1M total
Paul Martin can serve three years of his current contract normally plus seek a one-year exception. But he would lose one year of term to UFA status due to overall contract length. Cap change = -$1M AAV / -$5M total
Zbynek Michalek’s situation is just like Martin’s. Cap change = -$800K AAV / -$4M total
Brooks Orpik and Kristopher Letang both need a one-year exception to finish out their contract term. Cap change = $0
Ben Lovejoy, Brent Johnson and Craig Adams are all paid under the LMC floor and are due a raise. Cap change = $462.5K AAV / $975K total
The 10 players’ contracts to fix put the Penguins a bit above the average. But -$985K AAV / -$4.925M total makes the midnight oil burning worth it to management. Two players (brand new Pens Martin and Michalek) each lose one year of term in the transition.
SJS – In terms of dollars, the Sharks currently have Danny Heatley at FPC I status and Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau and Dan Boyle at FPC II status. No player is at FPC III status.
Despite turning 30 years old at mid-season, Heatley can still complete his contracted term as the FPC I with a one-year exception and the one-time FPC I Ceiling raise. Cap change = $825K AAV / $3.3M total
Thornton will only be 31 throughout the season. The question is with a one-year deal, do the Sharks want to make him the FPC II? For the purposes of this analysis, I would say no, they do not, lower him to the NFC maximum, and clean up the money with a bonus. Cap change = $0 AAV and total with a bonus to make up the difference
Marleau, the closest to the FPC II marker, gets the FPC II designation. However, he turns 31 before the season starts, so can only serve two of the four years normally, gets a one-year FPC II raise, and receives a one-year exception before being released to UFA status. Cap change = -$1.65M AAV / -$6.6M total
And Boyle, though money-wise does it, is already 34 so does not qualify to receive FPC status. With a current, four-year term, he can play two years at the NFC Maximum with bonus money to equal out the dollars, get a one-year exception for year three, but will become a UFA in the final season. The actual Cap change = -$1.667M AAV / -$6.667M total when bonus are factored in over term
Joe Pavelski needs a one-year exception to carry his current contract as is. Cap change = $0 AAV and total
Cameron MacIntyre, Jamal Mayers, Jason Demers, Jay Leich and Thomas Greiss all have contracts under the LMC floor and require raises. Cap change = $0 AAV and total
And the Sharks go higher than the average with 10 contractual issues, not the least of which is four players meeting FPC status-money. Total Cap change in San Jose is -$2.284M AAV / -$1.935M overall. Two players (Marleau and Boyle) would lose one year each of contract term based on length of current contracts.
The Coyotes have the least woes in this group as five player contracts under contention with the proposed CBA yield only about one-third of the average Cap change in favor of the team. They also have one player losing two years’ term.
The Senators are just under the average with seven contract issues and are just about average in terms of Cap difference dollars. OTT is right in line with PIT and SJS from this group with two players losing one each term year off of the current agreement.
The Flyers only have eight players’ contracts at issue with the CBA. But I am tempted to say they have the most challenges as five of the eight players (Briere, Timonen, Richards, Pronger and Shelley) lose a total of 10 years’ term that was put in place to meet the current CBA’s requirements.
The Penguins carry 10 players with issues. To make Malkin’s dollar issue go away, he was re-designated the FPC II with accompanying bonuses to make up the deficit from his current salary. And Martin and Michalek who just joined the team would not be eligible for the full four years of their term – even with an exception – due to age. So the two each lose one year of term to UFA status.
And finally, the Sharks, despite too much money in four players, come out with 10 total contractual issues and only lose one year of term each for Marleau and Boyle. Some bonus money had to be paid to Thornton and Boyle while under contract, but the average loss per player compared to the rest of this group only place them at #3 out of five.
Through 25 of the NHL’s 30 teams, the averages are: 8.4 players affected per team (slight down-tick from the last report); for an average team payroll difference of -$12.573M (up from 1 – 20 numbers); and with 1.4 players losing 2.76 years of term (both up slightly from the last post). The last five teams are before us, and then we will look at an overall assessment of the entire League with comments on where to go reference the circumvention loophole.
The next five teams up for analysis will be STL, TBL, TOR, VAN and WSH.
Take me to “The Next CBA: Part I”
Take me to “The Next CBA: Part II”
Take me to analysis for ANA through CGY (U.2)
Take me to analysis for CAR through DAL (U.2)
Take me to DET through MIN (U.1)
Take me to MTL through NYR
Take me to On Goal Analysis and the OGA Blogs…