If half the teams have to shed, say, $10MM in salary to get to a $60MM cap - and they can't bury guys in other leagues any more - how are they going to do it? Not all of them are going to be able to dump enough salaries to other teams.

What happens (even now) if the can't get below the cap?
- StLBravesFan

There isn't a luxury tax like baseball...So one way or the other via buyouts etc teams will have to get below the ceiling.

I think the $10 mill reduction should take place over 3 yrs...

On Twitter@AlCimaglia

If half the teams have to shed, say, $10MM in salary to get to a $60MM cap - and they can't bury guys in other leagues any more - how are they going to do it? Not all of them are going to be able to dump enough salaries to other teams.

What happens (even now) if the can't get below the cap?
- StLBravesFan

That would be an interesting situation. The NHL doesn't have a perfect track record in enforcing the cap/CBA rules. Last season, the Stars were under the cap floor for a few days. In a previous year, the Canucks only dressed 19 for a game because of salary cap hell, which violates the CBA.

I would assume a team in such a situation would be forced to buy out another player or two and take the half cap hit.

There isn't a luxury tax like baseball...So one way or the other via buyouts etc teams will have to get below the ceiling.

I think the $10 mill reduction should take place over 3 yrs...

On Twitter@AlCimaglia
- Al

3 years makes sense. Do we know if the current offer includes a roll back, and if so how much?

Edit: If there is no roll back, those contracts that Parise and Suter signed have a good chance of severely handicapping the Wild for a long time.

3 years makes sense. Do we know if the current offer includes a roll back, and if so how much?

Edit: If there is no roll back, those contracts that Parise and Suter signed have a good chance of severely handicapping the Wild for a long time.
- NewToHockey

■No contractual "roll backs" of Player Salaries

Leopold got who he wanted and now will have to pay in full it seems...

■No contractual "roll backs" of Player Salaries

Leopold got who he wanted and now will have to pay in full it seems...
- Al

Would that make one of their goalies more available? Although, didn't I read somewhere that one of them got seriously injured?

Would that make one of their goalies more available? Although, didn't I read somewhere that one of them got seriously injured?
- NewToHockey

Didn't hear about an injury and that's not the 1st position a team would want t gamble on.

Backstrom is in hs last year so if they aren't a playoff club he could be dealt in a few months.

Didn't hear about an injury and that's not the 1st position a team would want t gamble on.

Backstrom is in hs last year so if they aren't a playoff club he could be dealt in a few months.
- Al

http://espn.go.com/nhl/st...gnosed-multiple-sclerosis

So, not an injury, but still...

This is an interesting point. Hossa's contract is long, but barring any significant injury I think he has a lot of hockey let in him. Also, I don't think we have enough depth at forward to let Hossa go for nothing, not unless there is a plan to get somebody to replace him. Even then what's the point because you'll be looking at a similar cap hit. For this reason and others I say Hossa stays.

Crawford has only 1 more year left after this season, his cap hit isn't terrible. I think Crawford could be dealt or be a back-up if needed. So I think Crawford stays.

Olesz is a good option to buy out, the Hawks are getting zero value at the NHL level from him. I know they hoped Olesz could provide some quality depth on the 3rd line but that hasn't happened (for whatever reason). I think there's a good chance Olesz gets bought out.

Frolik could get bought out if Olesz wasn't already on the team. Frolik may deserve a buy out, but not as much as Olesz. Frolik stays or gets traded.

That leaves my #1 choice for a buyout - Steve Montador. Not including this season Olesz has $3.125 million (over 1 year) left on his contract, while Monty has $5.5 million (over 2 years). At best Montador is a 3rd pairing defenseman, and Brookbank can replace him for at least next season.
- DarthKane

I think the same thing, it's got to be Montador unless Q isn't the coach come 2013-2014. He was barely cracking the line up last year and when he was he was playing 5 minutes a night. After this season he's on the books for 2 more years. It's a cheap buyout and gets rid of a pretty bad deal by Bowman.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/8690231/josh-harding-minnesota-wild-diagnosed-multiple-sclerosis

So, not an injury, but still...
- NewToHockey

That is sad and hopefully he can have a full life. I have never heard of an athelete playing with MS but these days maybe it is possible.

There isn't a luxury tax like baseball...So one way or the other via buyouts etc teams will have to get below the ceiling.

I think the $10 mill reduction should take place over 3 yrs...

On Twitter@AlCimaglia
- Al

The $10 mil cap reduction seems like something the owners are not budging on. I think the players might be able to a get a couple mil more on the cap but I don't see the cap going north of $62mil-$63mil next year. Some teams are going to have to do some serious dumping like the Hawks did after they won the Cup.

I think the same thing, it's got to be Montador unless Q isn't the coach come 2013-2014. He was barely cracking the line up last year and when he was he was playing 5 minutes a night. After this season he's on the books for 2 more years. It's a cheap buyout and gets rid of a pretty bad deal by Bowman.
- dan9189

I would bet it isn't Olesz......

The $10 mil cap reduction seems like something the owners are not budging on. I think the players might be able to a get a couple mil more on the cap but I don't see the cap going north of $62mil-$63mil next year. Some teams are going to have to do some serious dumping like the Hawks did after they won the Cup.
- dan9189

That means jobs will be lost. At this point I'm not sure what is most important to Fehr.

That means jobs will be lost. At this point I'm not sure what is most important to Fehr.
- Al

True but each side has to pick and choose their battles if they're going to come to an agreement. Right now it seems as if (to me) the NHLPA has made the NHL concede more than they wanted to on many issues, that being said the NHL won't fold on every issue. It seems to me like the $60 mil cap and the 10 year CBA agreement are issues they want to "win" so to speak.

True but each side has to pick and choose their battles if they're going to come to an agreement. Right now it seems as if (to me) the NHLPA has made the NHL concede more than they wanted to on many issues, that being said the NHL won't fold on every issue. It seems to me like the $60 mil cap and the 10 year CBA agreement are issues they want to "win" so to speak.
- dan9189

To me the 10 yr...really 8 yr CBA should be a moot point for players.

Every new CBA has the players losing more than they gain.

To me the 10 yr...really 8 yr CBA should be a moot point for players.

Every new CBA has the players losing more than they gain.
- Al

Agree

I would bet it isn't Olesz......
- Al

Why do you say that?

I don't get it, how are teams supposed to get under the 60mil cap next season?What are the Hawks gonna do, trade Hossa and Kane? Or Seabs and Keith? I don't see how it is possible for them to unload so many players just to get under the cap...and they aren't the only team, there are a bunch of them who will have to get rid of contracts...I know there isn't a salary roll back, but will they adjust the cap hit for players by some percentage in the new CBA?

I mean the hawks will have to gut their team again just like after the CUP!

I don't get it, how are teams supposed to get under the 60mil cap next season?What are the Hawks gonna do, trade Hossa and Kane? Or Seabs and Keith? I don't see how it is possible for them to unload so many players just to get under the cap...and they aren't the only team, there are a bunch of them who will have to get rid of contracts...I know there isn't a salary roll back, but will they adjust the cap hit for players by some percentage in the new CBA?

I mean the hawks will have to gut their team again just like after the CUP!
- captainserious

Right now, the Hawks have 56,334,295 committed for 13-14. That includes 9 forwards, 6 D and Crawford. That would leave $3.3M and change for 3 more forwards and a backup goalie.

Right now, the Hawks have 56,334,295 committed for 13-14. That includes 9 forwards, 6 D and Crawford. That would leave $3.3M and change for 3 more forwards and a backup goalie.
- NewToHockey

That's why I brought up Hossa's name; however, if they bought out Olesz and traded Hjalmarsson or Bolland, they would be fine cap wise. Teams like Vancouver and Philly, who are pushing the $70M threshold, are the ones in serious trouble. While all the ridiculous deals were being handed out right before the CBA expired, teams like Chicago and Detroit were fairly quiet, putting them in a good position post-CBA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWauQoebGB4

That is the link for TT's goal against the Czech Republic yesterday...the goal is somewhere around the 40-45 second mark

Really nice goal if you ask me...shows his great hands and that he can get a quick shot off in a tight area.....TT's hands are just great, like Datsyuk and Kane great

The $10 mil cap reduction seems like something the owners are not budging on. I think the players might be able to a get a couple mil more on the cap but I don't see the cap going north of $62mil-$63mil next year. Some teams are going to have to do some serious dumping like the Hawks did after they won the Cup.
- dan9189

Isn't there something about the "make-whole" provisions that say that it's not counted against the cap for a team, but gets charged to the players' share of HRR?

Right now, the Hawks have 56,334,295 committed for 13-14. That includes 9 forwards, 6 D and Crawford. That would leave $3.3M and change for 3 more forwards and a backup goalie.
- NewToHockey

Don't they have to get to a 22/23 man roster? That would make it $3.3MM for 6 or 7 players.

Don't they have to get to a 22/23 man roster? That would make it $3.3MM for 6 or 7 players.
- StLBravesFan

I think you are correct. It looks like teams may have to fill out their rosters with players for the "A" to stay under the cap and that probably not the best thing for the quality of play.

Don't they have to get to a 22/23 man roster? That would make it $3.3MM for 6 or 7 players.
- StLBravesFan

Depends on the new CBA.... In the old CBA the max was 23 roster and normal minimum was 20 (18 skaters and 2 goalies).

Don't they have to get to a 22/23 man roster? That would make it $3.3MM for 6 or 7 players.
- StLBravesFan

Is this a provision of the new CBA? In the past, they only had to have 20 rostered players and had the option of having as many as 23.

Also, the cap number I put up didn't include Olesz. Not sure why he wasn't on there. So, he would need to retire, be bought out, etc.