Takes and trash talk from both ALL sides of the NHL's most obscure PATHETIC* rivalry

* Thanks, Kevin Lowe!

Friday, June 27, 2008

Help me understand the Ducks' cap situation


(click image to enlarge)

OK, here's the things to know about this chart:
1. I've taken all salary numbers from NHLSCAP.com, except Sutherby's salary comes from the OC Register blog. I have completely made up Perry's salary (I gave him Getzlaf's contract) and Selanne's non-retirement plus salary (I gave him $2M). Those assumptions are shaded in yellow, and certainly worth discussing. I've mostly made them up as placeholders, not as thought-out expectations.

2. I have been very careful to separate actual dollar spending from salary cap calculation, because when Burke talks about spending $50 million, he's talking about money, not averaged salary. In cases where spending is less than cap value, I've colored the dollars-spent in blue font. When spending exceeds cap value, they are colored in red. Contracts over time are generally level or ascending, and blue values usually indicate the start of a new contract.

3. I don't really know the rules about Bertuzzi's waiver status, but I've entered it in as best I know. In fact, the reason I'm posting this is so the BoC readership can correct where I've fucked shit up. I'm too lazy to even find out if buy-outs (like Michael Leighton) are possible in this waiver situation, but that's where informed readership pays off, right? Cleared up thanks to Mike!

4. My totals reflect all the players in boxes (includes Parros and one version of Bertuzzi, but not Salcido). To the right, I also show calculations for Salcido instead of Schneider, and then on top of that to replace Marchant with an anonymous $1-M replacement player. This second step isn't necessarily my recommendation, but Marchant is probably the next option who is getting paid more this year than his salary cap figure. Ironically, his salary is more reasonable this year than any previous year of his contract, considering the context of a fast-increasing salary cap.

5. As I indicate at the bottom of the chart, I've included $1.1M in bonuses for Bobby Ryan, but I have no idea how he does or doesn't earn them. That's one question I'd love to ask Brian Burke; it's probably better if the Anaheim fanbase knew of any constraints around Ryan's playing time.

So anyone who's inclined and knows their cap-math, please take a look at this chart and let me know if I got anything wrong; if you're compelling enough in the comments, I will alter the numbers and this post. I'm hoping to get this cap situation squared up for a follow-up "suggestions" post, but I'd like to get my facts straight first.

For now, I'll say this: keeping Schneider likely presents a salary cap issue, otherwise it's not important. Also, it's probably imperative that Corey Perry get an ascending, Getzlaf-like contract. If the target is to spend $50M this season, then his actual dollar salary needs to be lower than the averaged-amount it will take to sign him.

Anyways, fire away. Let's figure out this goddamn cap math.

13 comments:

Chris said...

Although your info looks sound, it's such a downer.

Mike said...

To address the Bert situation- waivers are the first step on the path to a buyout. If he is claimed on waviers, the Ducks owe nothing. If he is not claimed, he's eligible for assignment to the minors or a buyout.

Another option is a team is interested in Bert, but not his whole salary. In that case the Ducks can bring him back through "re-entry" waivers. If he's claimed in that instance, the Ducks owe half of his salary, the claiming team the other half. It's pretty close to the buyout figure, so it's not really worth putting in your neato chart.

From the CBA: "For
each Illustration, assume that the Player is over age 26 and therefore is
entitled to two-thirds (2/3) of his remaining Player Salary, to be paid
over twice the remaining length of the SPC, in the event he is bought
out pursuant to an Ordinary Course Buyout."

This implies Bert's buyout is done over the course of two years, which means the cash and cap hit are the same, $1.3M.

Schneider could be bought out too, btw, saving the Ducks $3.17M in cash and cap this coming season, but putting them on the hook for $1.83M cash and cap in 09-10.

Yes, I've read the CBA, and yes, I'm pathetic.

Earl Sleek said...

Great stuff, Mike, I'm incorporating your input. Thanks a ton for your patheticism!

Earl Sleek said...

Oh, and I didn't add a Schneider buy-out option just yet.

a) It's a different thing to put underachieving Bertuzzi on waivers than it is Schneider, who did more than fine in his easy minutes. The fact that he doesn't fit in a salary structure with a $13M pair of defensemen and a $7.3M pair of goalies has nothing to do with the quality of his play.

It's a possibility that he signed willingly into, btw. If I could correctly guess Scott's unretirement that summer, any idiot could.

b) Schneider does have trade value, possibly the source of this $1M player (possibly a prospect sort of kid)? I dunno, be creative, what sort of prospect would a team give up for a Schneider-and-Marchant package?

Experience + Two guys on reasonable last years of their contracts, sounds like it would be attractive to a few teams, no?

c) If Schneider does hit waivers, I'd guess a team would claim him.

Mike said...

Glad my obsession can finally be employed for the forces of good.

I agree that Schneider is very tradable, and that he would most likely be claimed if he were waived. Shit, I'd say the Sharks should claim him.

Mr. Plank said...

Shit, I'd say the Sharks should claim him.

Bingo.

Wooster11 said...

It'll be pretty tough to trade both Marchant and Schneider in a package together. I can't think of a team that would want to take on just over $8 million in salary for players under contract for one year, unless of course they feel those two players are their final pieces in order to win a cup. Ottawa - since they'll be losing Redden? Schneider is definitely tradable though. Trying to throw Marchant into the package would be nice for the Ducks, but I'd think they'd have to give up a draft pick as well as a prospect (or another pick) to make that deal. Plus the Ducks wouldn't get that much. But it would be nice to be able to pick up a forward in the $1.5-$2 million range for some sort of scoring help.

Earl Sleek said...

I'm still on fucking Atlanta time.

I can't think of a team that would want to take on just over $8 million in salary for players under contract for one year, unless of course they feel those two players are their final pieces in order to win a cup.

Actually, I was thinking more of a team that's looking to make a statement about legitimacy. I dunno, couldn't a team like Columbus, Florida, Chicago, or Atlanta use a veteran injection to help guide a youth movement?

Heck, even L.A. might benefit from that sort of playoff-experienced package, if the teams weren't so trade-o-phobic. I'm not sure if this is true, but I believe there's only been two trades between the Kings and Ducks, J.S. Aubin and the swap of draft picks this month.

I'm just projecting, though. I don't follow any of these teams closely enough to really know their spending and needs, but there should be a team out there playing a bunch of kids with money to spend, I'd guess.

Sarah said...

No way in hell Schneider gets waived.

Not only is it stupid since he has value, but Anaheim will dig a grave for themselves free agent wise. I know I harp on that a lot, but I can not overstate how badly the whole Schneider mess has hurt Anaheim. You don't take a guy with a good rep like Schneider (on the ice and in the NHLPA) and essentially "fire" him because of a mistake YOU (as in, the GM) made.

Betuzzi is a different story, and everyone understands that. He straight up didn't perform. Schneider is perfectly fine and would be a top 3 D on any team for probably another 2 years (or more); he's just getting pushed out because Niedermayer was a pussy and flip-flopped.

Sarah said...

Oh and one more thing (sorry, I'm both procrastinating from real work and held hostage inside, sans TV, due to the fire smoke, so I'm bored)..

Anaheim is going to have trouble moving Schneider. The problem is he is worth more than the Ducks can take on in return. I mentioned in another post a Marleau-Schneider deal, and it was mentioned that would be a stupid salary dump. And that's right (yes, I know Marleau makes more than Schneider). But that is what Schneider is worth in this market, established player-wise.

He's probably too old (in numbers, at least) for high draft picks or good prospects. Plus, he has made it very clear that his home is SoCal and he won't uproot his family again, so any team outside of CA is going to give pause before giving up a lot of future knowing that the chance is really good he'll bolt back to CA (even for less $$) next offseason.

They are in a pickle. He'll be moved, but it will be interesting to see how.

Earl Sleek said...

Anaheim is going to have trouble moving Schneider. The problem is he is worth more than the Ducks can take on in return.

I think these two statements are paradoxical. In theory, Burke should have an easier time moving Schneider because he doesn't need to get value back in return.

It's pre-July 1st and teams have differing degrees of unspent budget. I'd imagine there's teams that might find a Schneider trade a cheaper alternative than to get in a Campbell bidding war.

Scott said...

Firstly, I can't imagine Schneider being difficult to trade.

Secondly, most teams carry twenty-three guys on their roster and you only have salaries counted in the total for twenty-one. If they just sign two guys for 600k that's still an extra 1.2M to work into the budget, both cap and real dollars.

Earl Sleek said...

Good point on the number of players, though I'm not sure 23 is a requirement. Also, I'm not sure what number of players Burke meant when he said he wanted a $50M spending budget -- as I said, I suspect he's not talking about technical salary cap calculation.

At any rate, there's enough guesswork in the Perry and Selanne salaries that I'm not going to be that accurate in this sort of exercise; this is more table-napkin math in spreadsheet form.

Besides, I imagine at some point next year a money-ish player will get injured and a cheaper fill-in will play some replacement games; that might make up for the $1.2M upswing.