The New Salary Cap Thread

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVxUUotm1P4​

It's here. It's pretty much the same. It's back. It's fucking back. Some tidbits on the implications of the new CBA on the cap, courtesy of TSN:

Each team will be allowed two amnesty buyouts that can be used to terminate contracts after this season and next season. The buyouts will count against the players' overall share in revenues, but not the team's salary cap.
The upper limit on the salary cap in the first year is $60 million, but teams can spend up to $70.2 million (all pro-rated). The cap floor will be $44 million.
The league coming off their demand for a $60 million cap in Year 2, meeting the NHLPA's request to have it at $64.3 million - which was the upper limit from last year's cap. The salary floor in Year 2 will be $44 million.
The salary variance on contracts from year to year cannot vary more than 35 per cent and the final year cannot vary more than 50 per cent of the highest year.
A player contract term limit for free agents will be seven years and eight years for a team signing its own player.
Teams can only walk away from a player in salary arbitration if the award is at least $3.5 million. [I'd like to christen this the Tim Kennedy rule]
The NHL is suggesting the trade deadline for this season be April 5. The NHLPA has not yet agreed to it. Last year's deadline was February 27.
There will be tons of cap space come deadline day, as the rate of accrual of cap space is accelerated (with fewer days in the season) and the pro-rated upper limit of $70.2m is the highest in league history.

Without further ado, here's the B's cap situation in pictures:






TL;DR version: $2.14m in opening-day cap space with Bourque and Johnson on the roster, $1.04m if they decide to have Caron as forward #13 as well; on day 1, Savard goes on LTIR and the Bruins have $5-6m+ available daily throughout the season, which accrues to a huge amount by deadline day.
 

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
5,972
37
The Island
So you're saying they can sign PK Subban to that awesome offer sheet if they want?

On a serious note, how are the Bruins looking compared to other teams for the 2013-14 transition? Will they use an amnesty buyout? Who would be the guy bought out in that case?
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
I just don't see anyone who needs to be bought out next year at all. They are projected to have about 7 mill (11 with Savard on LTIR) in space to sign 4 players, 1F, 1D, and 2G. If anything, I think they could trade away a guy rather than buy him out.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
Savard would, IMO, be an interesting amnesty buyout candidate. He's completely done, but after this season he'll have 4 seasons left at salaries of $5m, $1.5m, $525k, $525k - that $4.007m cap hit is a heck of an inconvenience in trying to ice the best possible opening night roster.

The buyout amount would be $629,167 per season for 8 seasons, or just a shade over $5m total, with a big fat $0 cap hit. That's almost definitely still a net loss for Jacobs, who has Savard's contract insured and could well hide behind the "he won't play again, why buy him out if he can be stashed on LTIR" defense in order to not have to pay out the likely ~$1-2m that's not covered by insurance.

I can't see any other buyout candidates on the roster.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,150
35
South Park
Savard would, IMO, be an interesting amnesty buyout candidate. He's completely done, but after this season he'll have 4 seasons left at salaries of $5m, $1.5m, $525k, $525k - that $4.007m cap hit is a heck of an inconvenience in trying to ice the best possible opening night roster.

The buyout amount would be $629,167 per season for 8 seasons, or just a shade over $5m total, with a big fat $0 cap hit. That's almost definitely still a net loss for Jacobs, who has Savard's contract insured and could well hide behind the "he won't play again, why buy him out if he can be stashed on LTIR" defense in order to not have to pay out the likely ~$1-2m that's not covered by insurance.

I can't see any other buyout candidates on the roster.
You know me with Jacobs, I can't stand the guy and I never will like him, but if Savard is bought out after this year I will be the first one to give him some credit there. Jacobs will lose money on that deal, so I would not think he would do it, but if he does then at least I will be a little more convinced that how the team fares does really matter to him.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
BoSoxFink said:
You know me with Jacobs, I can't stand the guy and I never will like him, but if Savard is bought out after this year I will be the first one to give him some credit there. Jacobs will lose money on that deal, so I would not think he would do it, but if he does then at least I will be a little more convinced that how the team fares does really matter to him.
I wouldn't count on it... My guess is they play the LTIR game for one more season. The new CBA lets teams use an amnesty buyout before the '14-'15 season too, and it seems unlikely (unless one or two players get crippled between now and then) that they will have anyone else to use it on... My guess is they hedge their bets on using that one on Savard since at that point he's only owed a shade over $2.5M while still carrying that $4M cap hit over the three remaining seasons.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
Here's a preview of what the team faces going into the offseason - couple of notes: 
 
- Dom Tiano pointed out that, since Savard's injury is a pre-existing hockey injury, he can go on LTIR immediately and would not have to be on the cap-compliant opening-day roster. Needless to say, this is huge.
 
- Lots of mid-level veteran talent will be out the door to become cap compliant at $64.3m. This will be the case for many teams league-wide, and the Bruins have set themselves up very well to not have their roster or depth decimated by this severe drop.
 
I have assumed the following: 
 
1. Jagr is retained on a 1 year, $5m contract with performance bonuses to sweeten the pot. It appears that the cap will go up from $64.3m in 2014-15, and as such, the cap overage from any veteran performance bonuses being reached wouldn't be nearly as perilous as from this year going into 2013-14.
 
2. Rask is re-signed to a 5 year, $5.5m AAV contract. As he's still an RFA after this contract (whereas Howard would've been a UFA), I believe this is a fair AAV for 2 fewer UFA years bought for a top-10 goalie without the proven track record in the postseason.
 
3. Svedberg is brought up as the backup. Khudobin is great, but he will price himself out of the B's range unless they do what I believe to be the unthinkable and trade Rask.
 
4. Lucic is not amnestied. Any stretch of good play re-establishes at least some trade value, so that's out the window IMO. Additionally, the summer of 2014 will give teams the opportunity to amnesty any remaining bad deals.
 
5. Spooner is called up and plays as 3rd line center.
 
6. Peverley is moved in a deal for futures. He is due $7.75m over the next two seasons in real money, so amnestying him would cost Jacobs $2.25m per year for the next four years. I don't see this happening, and I believe Peverley has trade value (even if a pick has to be attached) despite what will undoubtedly be a buyer's market. I also don't think the Bruins withhold cap hit in any deal, as they will need all the maneuverability they can get.
 
7. Bartkowski remains as a mainstay on the blue line, and Krug is called up to battle with a (hopefully healthy) McQuaid for the #6 defenseman's job. Perhaps they rotate as the 6 and 7 to keep everybody fresh.
 
8. A fringe-top 6 UFA is signed to play the 3rd line RW role. My pick for this role is Viktor Stalberg, and I think a 3 year/$10m deal would be fair for a player of his caliber. For reference, he made $850,000 this past season, and projects to be a ~40 point guy over a full season.
 
Obviously, lots of assumptions here, but I believe they're realistic and represent the situation of a falling cap. Without further ado:
 

 

 

 

 
edit: forgot Söderberg & Marchand's AAV bump, and totaled wrong. Great. Also figured I should put the lines too:
 
Marchand - Bergeron - Seguin
Söderberg - Krejci - Jagr
Lucic - Spooner - Stalberg
Paille - Kelly - Campbell
Thornton
 
Chara - Hamilton
Seidenberg - Bartkowski
Krug - Boychuk
McQuaid
 
Rask
Svedberg
 
Looks like one of Kelly/Stalberg wouldn't be a possibility, probably wouldn't go after anyone in the UFA market at that point.
 

SawxSince67

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
1,963
51
The little town of Bethlehem.
Thank you very much.

Khudobin will be a # 1 elsewhere, agreed.

I will miss Ference.

I "thought" Krug looked overwhelmed in his handful of appearances, but assuming every youngster making the leap can acclimate like Dougie is silly.
 

NickEsasky

Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em
SoSH Member
Jul 24, 2001
8,068
40
Doesn't the cap reduction really hamper us in trying to trade Peverley? It seems like he is exactly the type of player teams won't be looking for as he will likely be overpaid under the new lower cap. That would seemingly limit us to teams that won't have cap issues next year like the Islanders. 
 

TheRealness

Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
10,834
The Dirty Shire
www.pmmlawyers.com
NickEsasky said:
Doesn't the cap reduction really hamper us in trying to trade Peverley? It seems like he is exactly the type of player teams won't be looking for as he will likely be overpaid under the new lower cap. That would seemingly limit us to teams that won't have cap issues next year like the Islanders. 
 
I think for a lot of teams that have low payrolls they could really use a versatile veteran forward with solid skill. I agree with PSK that he does have decent trade value, and isn't a poison pill. 
 
In looking at the numbers, and what you have theoretically given Stalberg, it seems like the Bruins would be able to fit in Horton and Jagr if they wanted to and could deal Peverley. Still, with those numbers, they are going to be right up against the cap with little to no room to add pieces on the deadline, but I suspect that will be common for every team that has a contending roster. 
 

Zososoxfan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
5,331
33
South of North
Visit site
The Boychuk numbers hurt. I don't know much about the amnesty process, but that contract doesn't look great. I like what he brings to the table and all, but not at >3.3 over the next 3 years. He's making nearly as much as Seids!
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,150
35
South Park
I know most people are full on against it and in a vacuum I would be too, however with the price that Rask is going to command, would anyone entertain the idea of trading him for a very good young scoring forward and keeping Khudobin as your starter at a cheaper contract with Svedberg to back him up? 
 
My guess is you could sign Khudobin for something like 3 years 2.5-3 million per as a starter rather than giving Rask 5-6 million per.  Plus if you are able to acquire a scoring forward in return, you won't have to go out and sign a Victor Stalberg. 
 
I am not saying this is definitely the route I would take, but it is something to think about it.  Especially if Rask was too struggle in the playoffs and it was an early first round exit for the Bruins.
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
BoSoxFink said:
I know most people are full on against it and in a vacuum I would be too, however with the price that Rask is going to command, would anyone entertain the idea of trading him for a very good young scoring forward and keeping Khudobin as your starter at a cheaper contract with Svedberg to back him up? 
 
My guess is you could sign Khudobin for something like 3 years 2.5-3 million per as a starter rather than giving Rask 5-6 million per.  Plus if you are able to acquire a scoring forward in return, you won't have to go out and sign a Victor Stalberg. 
 
I am not saying this is definitely the route I would take, but it is something to think about it.  Especially if Rask was too struggle in the playoffs and it was an early first round exit for the Bruins.
You've said this in like 5 threads now and I don't understand this sentiment one bit. Khudobin was a great find by Chiarelli, but what in the last 4 years has led you to believe that Tuukka shouldn't be a #1 for this team? The only reservation I can think of is that he still hasn't played a full season as a #1.
 
Yet one can't say that and then argue that Khudobin should take over as #1, as he hasn't even played a full season as a backup yet. The organization has put a ton of years into developing Tuukka into a #1 goalie and then he plays 1/2 a year as the clear cut starter and they let him go while still an RFA? I don't get it. Wasn't the point of getting him to here so that he could be their goaltending anchor? Instead they're going to turn the reins over to a guy who has played a total of 20 NHL games?
 
I see absolutely zero merit in this strategy whatsoever. Tuukka is a stud young goalie that about 25 teams would kill to have and the Bruins would be nuts to give up on him right as he's making the leap to potential Vezina finalist.
 

TheShynessClinic

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
I think a lot depends on the playoffs this year.
 
If the team is one and done again, I can see Chia shedding some of the contracts (Boychuk, Horton, Peverley) and allowing the kids (Spooner, Knight, Krug) to play in a bridge year next year. Bergeron and Seids are coming up next offseason and they are two players I think this team HAS to keep.
 
If the team makes a run and appears a piece or two away, I can see PSK's plan coming to fruition. 
 

thehitcat

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 25, 2003
1,543
48
Windham, ME
Visit site
Can I ask why you wouldn't just keep Peverley and slot him on the third line wing rather than going to get Stalberg?  I assume that this is an upside play combined with getting younger at the wing but there is some value to keeping Peverley because you know what you have with him and he is able to switch between Wing and Center which also has some value especially if Spooner craters.  Maybe I undervalue Stalberg (possible as I don't really know him) and overvalue Peverley. 
 
Edit 3 E's riiight...
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
I'm also not sure why you wouldn't want to re-sign Horton in that scenario instead of signing Stalberg. I think he's in for a pay cut after 2 years of injuries and only decent production. I don't think it's fait accompli that he's going to get the same AAV that he's earning now.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
21,702
35
306, row 14
Visit site
Yeah, I'd just keep Peverley. He's had a bit of a down year, but has come on of late. He's a guy that can play in all situations. PP, PK, top 6, bottom 6, winger, center, etc. he provides a ton of value. His cap hit may be a tad high under the new CBA, but he is a very useful player that I'd like to hang onto.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
Made some edits, first draft was pretty sloppy. Re-signing Jagr would be a big ask, unless he goes something like $2m base with incentives (he wouldn't). 
 
With the squeeze I now see them having, they may have to go into camp with Paille in the top 9, which I wouldn't be against. They could get cap-compliant with the following lineup:
 
Marchand - Bergeron - Seguin
Lucic - Krejci - Söderberg
Paille - Spooner - Kelly
Caron ($650k one-way) - Campbell - Thornton
Bourque ($550k)
 
Chara - Hamilton
Bartkowski - Seidenberg
Krug - Boychuk
McQuaid
 
Rask
Svedberg
 
eliminated: Stalberg/Peverley, Jagr = $7.25m saved, added: Caron, Bourque = $1.2m => total of $1.1m under the cap
 
Regarding wanting to sign Stalberg and let Peverley go: Krejci/Spooner/Bergeron/Kelly/Campbell/Söderberg on the roster would give the B's enough centers/PK guys to render Peverley redundant. Speed down the wings is something this team is lacking outside of Paille, Marchand, and Seguin. Stalberg and Spooner on a line with Lucic would, IMO, be sex.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,150
35
South Park
T4P, just for clarification, I have never said this before.  I am not sure why you think I have said this like 5 times. From what I can recall I have never said it, but yes, others have.
 
edit: I also didn't say it was a route I would take.  I just said it is something to think about if they get into real cap trouble when trying to sign him.
 

BigMike

Dope
Dope
Sep 26, 2000
21,331
51
Visit site
I can't see a reason to amnesty anyone on this team.  There may be a contract or two you decide to move, but I don't see anyone with a contract that is so bad that they couldn't be dealt.  
 
To put Lucic in a sentence with Amnesty seems silly, as I have no doubt teams would line up for him even after this bad year. He is still a very unique talent in the league.
 
Peverly is a bit high, but at the same time come July 1rst, there will be teams giving players no better or not much better than Pevs 4.5 mil a year or more.
 
Complaining about Boychuk contact is silly. Yeah he is high paid compared to Seids (who is a bargain and would be 4.5-5 mil player on the open market), but for a guy who is a solid 4 in this league, he'd make 4 million easily if he was a UFA.
 
In terms of Khudobin.   I guess if they were to make a decision to part ways with Rask, and trade him for a package of talent.  I am still not sure how much I would commit long term to Khudobin.  Yeah he has that Thomas like flair for the spectacular,  and the same bad rebounds, etc.  I certainly have seen nothing that would give me confidence in him across a long series, where teams can prepare for his limitations.   Personally I love everything I have read about Svedberg, and see him as more of a threat for Rask than Khudobin
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
10,914
36
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
Rask is a legitimate top-3 goalie in the league. You don't trade that kind of goaltending talent when they're 26 years old and still in their RFA years. As the Blue Jackets are demonstrating this year, goaltending can take you a long way in this league. I like not having to worry about the performance of our goalie and I'd like to keep it that way.
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
BoSoxFink said:
T4P, just for clarification, I have never said this before.  I am not sure why you think I have said this like 5 times. From what I can recall I have never said it, but yes, others have.
 
edit: I also didn't say it was a route I would take.  I just said it is something to think about if they get into real cap trouble when trying to sign him.
I must have gotten it mixed up with something else then, my apologies. I still don't think it's even worth addressing/thinking about, but that's me.
 
Edit: In all honesty, I was probably confusing you calling for Lucic to be traded, not Rask.
 

ajml

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2005
397
The Four Peters said:
I'm also not sure why you wouldn't want to re-sign Horton in that scenario instead of signing Stalberg. I think he's in for a pay cut after 2 years of injuries and only decent production. I don't think it's fait accompli that he's going to get the same AAV that he's earning now.
I'm not a huge Horton fan but for a third liner you could do a lot worse if the money is right. He seems exactly like the type of player who will not get a huge deal with the new cap. If the indications are right that he loves it in Boston he may very well take a team friendly deal. If that was the case I wouldn't be against keeping him.
 

erfus

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 5, 2002
1,595
BigMike said:
I can't see a reason to amnesty anyone on this team.  There may be a contract or two you decide to move, but I don't see anyone with a contract that is so bad that they couldn't be dealt.  
 
To put Lucic in a sentence with Amnesty seems silly, as I have no doubt teams would line up for him even after this bad year. He is still a very unique talent in the league.
 
Peverly is a bit high, but at the same time come July 1rst, there will be teams giving players no better or not much better than Pevs 4.5 mil a year or more.
 
Complaining about Boychuk contact is silly. Yeah he is high paid compared to Seids (who is a bargain and would be 4.5-5 mil player on the open market), but for a guy who is a solid 4 in this league, he'd make 4 million easily if he was a UFA.
 
In terms of Khudobin.   I guess if they were to make a decision to part ways with Rask, and trade him for a package of talent.  I am still not sure how much I would commit long term to Khudobin.  Yeah he has that Thomas like flair for the spectacular,  and the same bad rebounds, etc.  I certainly have seen nothing that would give me confidence in him across a long series, where teams can prepare for his limitations.   Personally I love everything I have read about Svedberg, and see him as more of a threat for Rask than Khudobin
 
I agree there's no need to amnesty anyone.  I, however, do think that the Bruins have better uses for their money then to allocate it on complimentary players like Peverley, Boychuk, and possibly Kelly.  Boychuk has regressed this year IMO.  He's lost some mobility (maybe due to injury) and isn't productive offensively.  I don't think he's a good top 4 D on a Cup winning team and would look to move him while he still has trade value and maybe add a D on top of that (relying on Krug and Bartkowski for depth).  I'd like to see Spooner in the mix at the NHL level as an ELC, which could make Kelly expendable (though I think he adds value to the team).  Peverley may be the one guy who has just worn out his welcome. 
 
But, this is all premature.  I think this year's playoff run will go a long way to influencing the Bruins decisions on how much tweaking is necessary.  If they go to the conference finals or further, Rask plays well, or are bounced by a healthy Penguins squad in a close series then they probably stick to the path.  If they have another disappointing exit, I am guessing that they do a little more due diligence on swapping some of the parts around.  Particularly depending on Rask's contract demands, which is a wildcard here.  He's been pretty reasonable to date, but if he lays an egg in the playoffs and wants a Jimmy Howard+ deal... 
 

Manzivino

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
5,947
36
Milford, Ma
I'm cross-posting this from the Jagr thread, where it was originally written as a path to keep Jagr and stay cap compliant. You can do it but it's unlikely and leaves you right up against the cap, and you're almost certain to have bonus overages into 2014-15. 
 


Manzivino said:
Keeping Jagr for next year would be a top priority of mine in the offseason, but letting Horton walk is already a given and it doesn't get you close to enough cap room to keep Jagr and ice a full roster. Jagr made $4.55M this year and I can't imagine him taking a cut next year given his production. The Bruins already have $55M on the books for next year because of the Lucic, Seguin and Marchand extensions kicking in; assuming the cap stays flat as expected, they have $10M in cap space after putting Savard on LTIR. At least $5M of that is going to Rask's extension given the recent contracts handed out to goalies. That leaves you $5M for:
  • Horton's replacement in the top-6
  • a 6th/7th D (Bartkowski takes up one of those slots on a one-way deal next year)
  • a 13th forward (most likely Bourque to start the year given his cheap one-way deal)
  • a backup goalie (probably Svedberg since I doubt Khudobin re-signs for short money and short years to be a backup again)
Assuming Krug, Bourque and Svedberg fill the latter 3 slots that's an additional $2.255M in salary (and $1M in potential bonuses), leaving you $2.655M for a top 6 wing, not nearly enough to fit Jagr in.
 
The ideal solution is to find a taker for Peverley's remaining 2 years at $3.25M - one that's on his list of approved destinations because of course he has a limited no-trade clause, why wouldn't he? - and call up Spooner to play C on the 3rd line with Kelly sliding to wing and covering for him defensively. That saves you an additional $2.465M, for a total of $5.12M in cap space. If you can get Jagr to re-sign at his current cap hit of $4.55M, that leaves you with ~$700k in cap space for the rest of the year, and a potential $1.1M in bonus overages that would roll into 2014-15. That gives you a roster of:
 
Marchand-Bergeron-Seguin / Lucic-Krejci-Jagr / Soderberg-Spooner-Kelly / Paille-Campbell-Thornton / Bourque
 
Chara-Hamilton / Seidenberg-Boychuk / McQuaid-Bartkowski / Krug
 
Rask / Svedberg
 
I think that's your best case scenario for Opening Day 2013 as it stands today, and even that leaves you gnat's ass tight against the cap with a lot of lower-end assumptions on dollars (Rask's extension coming in at $5M or below, trading Peverley without any NHL salary coming back, nobody offering Jagr a raise, Spooner/Krug/Svedberg all being NHL-ready next year). Bottom line, as much as I'd love to see Jagr back next year, I don't see it being feasible from a cap perspective absent a perfect storm of favorable events.
 
If you subtract Jagr from the above, that puts you at ~$5M in cap space for $1.8M in potential bonuses, a top 9 wing, wiggle room on Rask's extension and space during the season. Either way I think the most logical move from a cap perspective this offseason is to move one of Peverley/Kelly to make room for Spooner, and Peverley is both more expensive and has the less restrictive NTC.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
With the uncertainty surrounding Rask's new AAV level, as well as the re-emergence of Playoff Horton, I took a look at what this summer will hold for PC and company. Eaves's (negligible) buyout is finally up, and I've decided to omit Savard as his LTIR condition was a pre-existing hockey injury, meaning he doesn't have his cap hit added to the opening night roster and can go on LTIR straight away.
 
Here's where the roster would stand on opening night as currently constructed:
 

 
RFA:
Daugavins
Rask
 
UFA:
Jagr
Horton
Pandolfo
Ference
Redden
Johnson
Khudobin
 
Lineup:
 
Lucic - Krejci - Seguin
Marchand - Bergeron - Spooner
Söderberg - Kelly - Peverley
Paille - Campbell - Thornton
XX
 
Chara - Hamilton
Seidenberg - Boychuk
Krug - McQuaid
Bartkowski
 
XX
Svedberg
 
With that existing $5,648,333.33 in cap space, the Bruins would be right on the cusp of being able to retain Rask, with no wiggle room or extra forwards. 
 
Step 1: Trade/compliance buyout of Peverley to retain Rask
 
The prevailing notion is that, if he can't be moved in a salary dump, Peverley would be a compliance buyout - this definitely appears to be the way to go with Peverley's form dipping so severely, but I believe he could still hold some trade value at $3.25m AAV. On top of that, his 8-team trade list submitted by 10/1/12 expands to 15 teams come 10/1/13, so the need to move him to create space for Rask/potentially bringing Horton back is further heightened.
 
Of course, with the dropping cap, teams that would normally be able to take a chance on the 31 year old Peverley returning even to his '11-'12 form (57 GP - 11 G - 31 A - 42 P) are going to be looking at other buyouts like Briere as alternatives, potentially at a discount. Excluding obvious rebuilding squads, here are teamswho have more than $2.5m in Capgeek's handy $/opening in terms of NHL roster spots (on a 23 man roster) - my possibilities are bolded:
 
Nashville - Legwand/Fisher/Wilson/Forsberg/Smith/Gaustad as options down the middle - their roster is pretty much set already, and they've previously waived Peverley. Not happening IMO
Winnipeg - RFAs include Wheeler, Little, Burmistrov, and Bogosian - with Jokinen/Slater on the roster and Scheifele likely getting his shot this year, I doubt they re-acquire Peverley.
New Jersey - $22m in cap space to retain Lokhtionov, Henrique, Josefson, and perhaps D'Agostini - not to mention Elias, Zubrus, and the seemingly departing Clarkson. I don't think they're a fit.
Columbus - Depends how much they have left after taking care of Bobrovsky/Anisimov and whether Prospal will return. Johansen hasn't matured into that #1 role yet and Umberger/Letestu are not viable top-6 centers. My bet is they go after someone bigger like Ribeiro.
Dallas - Even though Nieuwendyk's gone, I'm not sure a team that signed Ray Whitney to a 2 year deal and proceeded to sell off Ryder, Morrow, and Jagr while in 9th place knows what they want to do. However, they're weak down the middle behind Benn, and even if Eakin can step into a full-time role they'll need more depth than Vernon Fiddler. All their important RFAs are signed to boot. If there's a partner to be had, my money's on the Stars.
St. Louis - Berglund/Stewart/Pietrangelo/Shattenkirk/Russell as RFAs - they won't have cap space for long.
Detroit - With Datsyuk re-upping and Howard's mega-deal, they're clearly still in win-it-now mode. However, moving in-division would complicate any potential trade.
New York Islanders - Tavares/Bailey (RFA)/Nielsen down the middle, could take a flier I guess but they don't strike me as the kind of team that would take a gamble for more than one year on a vet like Peverley.
Ottawa - in-division, Spezza/Turris/Zibanejad/Smith/O'Brien down the middle, Noesen/Puempel/Robinson coming up soon - longshot.
 
In the best case, they get back a low-round pick for Peverley from one of these teams. If not, a compliance buyout gives them the room to pay Rask the ~5 year/$6m AAV deal he's earned. After that move, I imagine they re-sign Daugavins and/or Caron (~$700,000 1-way - loser in camp is waived to Providence if he isn't claimed) and call up Bourque as the 13th forward. Then comes the tough decision regarding Kelly.
 
Scenario 1: Keep Kelly, Horton goes as a UFA
 

 
Daugavins - Kelly - Söderberg becomes the third line, without a clear way to keep Horton still. With Kelly's $3.25m looming as another attractive potential buyout option (giving them the $4.5m+ it would likely require to keep Horton), I believe they'll keep the second compliance buyout in their back pocket. Bergeron is unrestricted after 2013-14 - while I'm sure he isn't going to try and break the bank in the interest of preserving the current squad as much as possible, he'll still be seeking a bump up from $5m AAV. Also, Seidenberg is up that year, and barring something very much unforeseen they'll have to clear space in addition to his current $3.25m to retain him.
 
On the flip side, the cap will be increasing, and they could  compliance Kelly and even attempt to bring him back on a lesser cap figure. There is a precedent for this, as the Senators did this coming out of the '04-'05 lockout with Alfredsson. Regardless, amnestying Kelly would allow them to...
 
Scenario 2: Compliance Kelly, re-sign Horton
 

 
Lineup:
 
Lucic - Krejci - Horton
Marchand - Bergeron - Seguin
Daugavins - Spooner - Söderberg
Paille - Campbell - Thornton
 
Without a doubt, this is the strongest roster on paper - however, with what happened to the Rangers this year and the Blackhawks after their Cup run after they sacrificed multiple character guys to acquire/retain scorers, I'm sure the front office would tread lightly. Kelly's contributions in the locker room seem to be very tangible.
 
Another factor to consider is the timeline for Campbell's return - though with a clean bone break, I doubt he'll be out of commission for 4+ months. Even if he is, it was a pre-existing hockey-related injury, so he would only need to have space cleared for him upon his return from LTIR.
 
There's no scenario in which see Jagr coming back - especially if he goes out on top. There were rumors of him negotiating with Lev Praha before the Cup began, and in the end I think another trip to the KHL is in order in part due to what'll be a lean 2013-14 for UFAs. For my purposes, I'm not envisioning a scenario in which he returns, much as I'd like him to.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
3,782
One other possibility: Trading Boychuk. After the playoffs he's had, Boychuk's value is at an all-time high, and moving him creates even more space than moving Kelly. It does put some stress on the defensive depth chart, as Trotman and Warfosky are clearly less attractive options as reserve D-men than having Bartkowski in that role, but I don't think the overall talent is reduced too much compared to this year (particularly if Hamilton can make any kind of second year leap).
 
I think it's an option that would have to be considered.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
8,923
With Krug/Hamilton aren't their actual cap hits only $850K and $735K respectively?  They have additional cap hits related to performance bonuses but those can be tricky to calculate and can be rolled into the next season if necessary I believe.
 
If that is the case that shaves an additional 1.4-1.5M in cap space.  Just enough to cover the extra players you need for injury call-ups and more than enough for a trade deadline acquisition.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
Trading Boychuk gives you more value per cap dollar if you can get a contributing ELC forward or defenseman back, but I just don't see them doing so when there is both the excess of NHL-ready cheap talent in the system at forward and a relative dearth (as Scoops noted) behind Bartkowski. The value of Boychuk's #1 pairing regular season and #2 pairing postseason minutes dwarfs Kelly's IMO - and I know I'd feel a lot less comfortable this postseason with Bartkowski and Krug both in there.

Regarding the performance bonuses, I was under the impression that they stayed counting against the cap max and would be knocked off that total once they became unattainable (in the case of games played/wins bonuses) or at season's end (in the case of goal/assist/GAA bonuses). I could well be wrong, but as I understand it the bonuses are only ignored when teams are looking to meet the cap floor - which is a great addition:

Payroll Lower Limit must be satisfied without performance bonuses
Link

The final CBA was signed at long last a few weeks ago, I'll take a look through it later today to see if anything can be deciphered from that myt jargon.
 

Domer

Well-Known Member
Bronze Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2010
3,411
02148
If Gapgeek is to believed, players who have received compliance buyouts are ineligible to to return to their teams for one season. That provision prevents a team from buying out a marquee player and returning him for a fraction of his original AAV.

http://www.capgeek.com/faq/how-do-buyouts-work
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
Ah good find, that makes sense - perhaps they can find a taker to buy him out and sweeten the pot with a draft pick before re-signing him.
 
I still think they keep him in the end.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
21,516
Here
If the Bruins sign Rask to a huge deal and the cap stays about the same next year, will the Bruins lose Bergeron in 2014? If Rask gets a 6.5 AAV + offer from someone, do you let him walk? All things equal, I'd rather have Bergy, but his concussion history also has to factor into any long-term decision. They may also be able to keep both, but it looks like it could be real close money-wise.
 

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
5,972
37
The Island
How big a raise do you see Bergeron getting? He's already at $5m AAV, and while he's been money for a long time, I'm not sure too many people are going to offer him a whole lot more than that.
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
Every rumor I've heard (no sources, just what I remember) is that the first order of business this summer is to lock Bergeron up long term. I think that's going to happen right away (since it doesn't affect next year's cap), then Tuukka gets re-signed, then all of the other pieces fall into place. Bergeron isn't going anywhere, nor do I want him to.
 
Rask is also an RFA this year. He won't get a huge offer I don't think, and if he does I bet the Bruins would match them.
 

Spaulding Smails

Worth a thousand words
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2009
2,720
36
Bushwood CC/The Yacht Club
Yeah I thought TSN mentioned last week about whispers of signing Bergeron to an 8 year deal this summer.  I would imagine somewhere in the neighborhood of 8/$44 million, crazy to think he would still only be 35 at the end of that deal.
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
Spaulding Smails said:
Yeah I thought TSN mentioned last week about whispers of signing Bergeron to an 8 year deal this summer.  I would imagine somewhere in the neighborhood of 8/$44 million, crazy to think he would still only be 35 at the end of that deal.
Wow that is absurd. If he stays healthy (a HUGE if), he could end up here for 15-20 years when all is said and done.
 
Was just talking with Esasky about this offline, but he is my favorite Bruins player of all time, surpassing Bourque and Neely. I've run out of superlatives to describe him.
 

Spaulding Smails

Worth a thousand words
SoSH Member
Jan 21, 2009
2,720
36
Bushwood CC/The Yacht Club
You just worry about the freak plays on him that caused concussions in the past (this year against Ottawa, colliding with Seidenberg).  Giroux's hit on him was one of the few times you ever see him get lit up, his ability to take and roll off hits is amazing. 
 
Assuming good health, you'll see his number up in the rafters some day.  So happy he is finally getting the national recognition he deserves, fantastic player.
 

BigMike

Dope
Dope
Sep 26, 2000
21,331
51
Visit site
Ed Hillel said:
If the Bruins sign Rask to a huge deal and the cap stays about the same next year, will the Bruins lose Bergeron in 2014? If Rask gets a 6.5 AAV + offer from someone, do you let him walk? All things equal, I'd rather have Bergy, but his concussion history also has to factor into any long-term decision. They may also be able to keep both, but it looks like it could be real close money-wise.
 
No there is no way you let Rask go, you are talking about someone who has a really good chance of being the best goalie in the NHL for the next decade.
 
Signing Rask is the #1 priority, and will happen before the new league year and he is eligible for RFA
 
Bergeron deal may be agreed to  already for all we know, but  it can't be finalized until the new cap year.
 

LogansDad

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
17,138
39
Alamogordo
Visit site
I know nothing about hockey contracts, salary caps, and how this process generally works.  With that in mind, Tuukka is 26 years old, would it be feasible to offer him, say, instead of the 5 yrs @ $6 mil AAV that PSK mentions above, offer him 8 yrs at $5 AAV and save $1 mil a year?  8 years is a long time, but, at least to my eye,
 
Tuukka doesn't seem to be the type of goalie who will atrophy by injury.  With Thomas, well 1) he was old, and 2) a lot of his saves were his reflexes and mobility to get back when he found himself out of position.  I always kind of felt like he was a bit of an injury risk for these reasons. 
 
Tuukka seems to be much more economical in his movement.  More of a right place, right time goalie than Thomas was, which I think negates the injury risk a bit, and also bodes well for his future as he maybe slows down a little bit.
 
Anyway, does this seem realistic, or am I totally out to lunch?
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
Nov 17, 2010
10,586
34
I had no interest in bringing Horton back, but "playoff Horton" may be worth all the headaches.
 
If I recall, the Bruins can buy out two contracts still, correct? If that's the case, is there any chance they buyout Kelly and Peverley? I'm sure the B's want to keep some "character guys", but at nearly $7million for their combined production this year, we'd be able to bring in Horton, Rask, a mid level free agent (bring back Jagr?), and still let Soderberg/Spooner/Caron battle it out for the third line. Or bring in Horton/Rask, have some wiggle room for salary down the line (trade deadline, extensions, etc), and let 2 of Soderberg/Spooner/Caron take spots.
 
As much as I love "character guys", we still have Campbell, Thorty, Paille, Bergeron, Chara, Seids...I don't see character being an issue without Kelly/Pev's.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
24,394
30
Cambridge, MA
Visit site
j44thor said:
Chris Bourque has apparently agreed with the KHL AK Bars next season.
That will save $500K off the cap since he had a one-way deal next season and was very unlikely to make the team.
 
http://en.rsport.ru/hockey/20130618/668766031.html
Interesting, guess this increases the probability of one more chance for Caron. At his age I wouldn't mind one bit, despite his lack of wheels.
 
To speak to LD's point, I think Bryzgalov/DiPietro/Luongo are cases in point that you don't want to go beyond 4-5 years for a goalie, regardless of their ability. There's just way too much risk involved.
 

TFP

Dope
Dope
Dec 10, 2007
17,291
Kenny F'ing Powers said:
If I recall, the Bruins can buy out two contracts still, correct? If that's the case, is there any chance they buyout Kelly and Peverley? 
Umm, did you read PSK's (awesome) post halfway up the page? He kinda covers the chances in detail.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
Nov 17, 2010
10,586
34
The Four Peters said:
Umm, did you read PSK's (awesome) post halfway up the page? He kinda covers the chances in detail.
 
Ah, got it. I wasn't aware the stipulation to all of those options was to buy out Peverley first. Thats what I get for being lazy and only skimming through the post (and it was good PSK).
 
Apologies.