| bobbinka | 07-07-2020 02:23 PM |
Better context: https://www.reddit.com/r/canucks/com...cap_recapture/ Quote:
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding in the comments of Drancer's post about cap recapture, so I thought I'd make a post about it. For starters - he's completely right. It's total bullshit that teams get penalized for contracts signed legally. But for some reason a lot of fans got this idea that the penalties are being absolved or reduced. That is categorically untrue. Legal contracts of players like Weber, Parise and Suter are still eligible for recapture penalties.
What happens now is that the value of a recapture penalty cannot exceed the AAV of the contract. Take Shea Weber - Nashville paid him $56 million dollars, and he accrued a cap hit of around $31.4 million, prior to his 2016 trade to Montreal. So they have a penalty of $24.5 million. If Weber were to retire with a year left, under he prior rules, this full penalty would hit them in one year. Now, what would happen is his $7.857 million cap hit would be penalized against the cap until the penalty was paid off. In other words, if Weber retires with one year left on his deal in 2025:
Old Rules:
2025-26: $24.6 million
New Rules:
2025-26: $7.857 million
2026-27: $7.857 million
2027-28: $7.857 million
2028-29: $1.03 million
They're still penalized the full amount of money, but over a longer time. So while they wouldn't have to shed, say a ton of contracts for a single year, they'd have to find a lot of room for a much longer time. We aren't the only team penalized (New Jersey and Los Angeles have recaptures as well), but we just happened to have a really tough situation. Thus far, the league has enforced it on every contract that qualifies. If they somehow absolve Nashville, Minnesota, etc, then we have a right to get irate.
| Quote:
To add on, the only way the this would have applied to the Canucks would have been if Luongo retired after next season, and then the $9 million recapture would have been broken up over 2 seasons with $5.3 million for 2021-22 and the remainder for 2022-23.
Frankly, 3 seasons of knowing about a ~$3 million hit is easier to navigate then a sudden $5.3 million hit. As well, this is a result of a decision by Luongo to retire and leave the remainder of his contract on the table. Comparisons to other players like Pronger, Hossa, etc, don't make sense given those players made the choice to stay 'active' in the League. The NHL has been fairly consistent about how they've managed the recapture penalties so this persecution complex going around is naive.
| Quote:
the persecution complex is because fans don't pay attention to what else happens around the league, and get pissy. Yeah the canucks have been hit the hardest with recapture, but that's just how the rules ended up applying the recapture with the circumstances regarding Luongo's retirement. It just looks unfair when you look at the Canucks page on capfriendly, but the rules have been strictly and fairly applied across the board. It's just annoying when Luongo could have accepted a trade to Vancouver to LTIRetire or LTIRetired with the Panthers.
For example, Kovalchuk was just hitting the years of his salary being above his cap hit. He played two years for less, and one year for more. So the cap benefit the Devils received was still relatively low, and his remaining contract length was super long, ergo super low recapture. If he had played through the his high salary years, and retired when the salary dipped below the cap hit, the Devils would have been yeeted by recapture.
| The truth is, LU should've gone on LTIR like everyone else. |
