Max Cap Hits

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Max Cap Hits

Post by Meds »

While enjoying the turmoil in Oilerville I was thinking about contracts and cap hits and decided to look at teams around the league and the cap hits they have on their rosters.....got me thinking what should the internal bar be for a GM wanting to build a winning team.

Right now anything over $9.5M for a single player seems to be a recipe for not winning despite icing elite (or franchise) level talent.

Chicago was a dynasty in the making until they gave Toews and Kane matching $10.5M deals.....since then they've steadily declined into obscurity, missing the playoffs entirely, and been unable to add impact talent because of cap constraints.

LA won 2 Cups in 3 years. Then they gave Kopitar a $10M deal. Poof. They've been on a steady decline since.....doubling down and paying Doughty $11M was asinine.

Toronto. Oh Toronto. LOL! 3 players all over $10M and you can't even close the deal in the 1st round despite multiple chances to do so.

Edmonton gives McDavid $12.5M and wonder why they have no room for a good goaltender.

Then you have a team like Tampa, repeat champs who have not exceeded the $9.5M cap hit on any of their players.....admittedly they have a crazy top end on the payroll right now and have had to play salary cap games with Kucherov, but still, they didn't blow their minds on any single player.....so far.

Washington didn't blow their brains out, and only paid Ovechkin $9.5M starting this year, same with Backstrom (though the latter may be an overpayment to the tune of at least $1M).

The Pens have been a consistently solid team paying Malkin $9.5M but nobody else even makes $9M.....that's also thanks to Crosby being a team first guy who wants to build a winner at all costs. However, he's won 2 cups since he signed his current deal where he took a lower cap hit in order to leave more on the table for a winning roster.

It's a hard thing to factor when the cap is supposed go up and anything signed in year 1 should be taking up a lower percentage of the overall cap. However the current cap hits of over $9.5M are all on teams that are not exactly making a ton of noise.....and some of them are in already several years in.

I dunno. Just a thought.
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by SKYO »

All of those multiple Cup teams gave their core franchise players like 5 year deals after their ELC's at a lower AAV, then gave the big bucks after that.

Why I advocated for the shorter term deals for #40, #43 while some around here were like fuck that, give Petey and Hughes 8 years, MAX dollars.

Petey at 7.35 x3 and Hughes at 7.85 x6 is pretty fucking awesome, wish #40's contract had a bit more term, but he got the Barzal type contract, as Covid should be much more under control in the summer of 2024, plus cap should go up & it's time renegotiate his long term 8 year deal then.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Madcombinepilot
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7093
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 9:54 am
Location: Saskatoon, Sk.

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Madcombinepilot »

Did St. Louis even have a guy over 7?
The 'Chain of Command' is the chain I am going to beat you with until you understand I am in charge.
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by SKYO »

Madcombinepilot wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 7:57 pm Did St. Louis even have a guy over 7?
Tarasenko and ROR $7.5M AAV.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31126
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

SKYO wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 3:08 pm All of those multiple Cup teams gave their core franchise players like 5 year deals after their ELC's at a lower AAV, then gave the big bucks after that.

Why I advocated for the shorter term deals for #40, #43 while some around here were like fuck that, give Petey and Hughes 8 years, MAX dollars.

Petey at 7.35 x3 and Hughes at 7.85 x6 is pretty fucking awesome, wish #40's contract had a bit more term, but he got the Barzal type contract, as Covid should be much more under control in the summer of 2024, plus cap should go up & it's time renegotiate his long term 8 year deal then.
Who said give the MAX dollars? I remember being an advocate of signing them to as long of term as they could but I don’t remember saying ‘give them the MAX dollars’

Petey’s contract in hindsight is great considering how he’s pissed his pants this season. Hughes has been great and his contract is awesome.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by SKYO »

Vin Tanner wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 1:33 am
SKYO wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 3:08 pm All of those multiple Cup teams gave their core franchise players like 5 year deals after their ELC's at a lower AAV, then gave the big bucks after that.

Why I advocated for the shorter term deals for #40, #43 while some around here were like fuck that, give Petey and Hughes 8 years, MAX dollars.

Petey at 7.35 x3 and Hughes at 7.85 x6 is pretty fucking awesome, wish #40's contract had a bit more term, but he got the Barzal type contract, as Covid should be much more under control in the summer of 2024, plus cap should go up & it's time renegotiate his long term 8 year deal then.
Who said give the MAX dollars? I remember being an advocate of signing them to as long of term as they could but I don’t remember saying ‘give them the MAX dollars’

Petey’s contract in hindsight is great considering how he’s pissed his pants this season. Hughes has been great and his contract is awesome.
Well you ain't re-signing those types to 8 year deals unless it's pretty close to max $$$.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by SKYO »

What I don't feel is fair is the tax breaks Tampa Bay, Florida teams get, they can afford to sign their players cheaper as the players don't get much taken off in terms of income taxes, but up here in Canada we are getting taxed to death.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
MVP
MVP
Posts: 31126
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Blob Mckenzie »

Max cap hit is around 16 million Shopping Cart…. You think Hughes and Petey were getting in that range? Not likely.
“I don’t care what you and some other poster were talking about”
User avatar
Mickey107
MVP
MVP
Posts: 18820
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:27 am
Location: Richmond, B.C.

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Mickey107 »

SKYO wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:31 am What I don't feel is fair is the tax breaks Tampa Bay, Florida teams get, they can afford to sign their players cheaper as the players don't get much taken off in terms of income taxes, but up here in Canada we are getting taxed to death.
This is constantly forgotten. ALL or at least most of the golfers live in Florida. Yes because the weather is good but the tax breaks too.
Equalization may sound a little left wing but for NHL hockey, it should be talked about again.
"evolution"
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42928
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Strangelove »

Micky wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 10:44 am
SKYO wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 9:31 am What I don't feel is fair is the tax breaks Tampa Bay, Florida teams get, they can afford to sign their players cheaper as the players don't get much taken off in terms of income taxes, but up here in Canada we are getting taxed to death.
This is constantly forgotten. ALL or at least most of the golfers live in Florida. Yes because the weather is good but the tax breaks too.
No one interested in salary caps ever forgets that. :eh:

But here's something most of them don't know.

NHL players on Canadian teams have tax advantages available to them that players on American teams do not.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investi ... -canadian/
Financial advisers recommend their high-income clients, such as professional athletes, use a vehicle called a Retirement Compensation Arrangement (RCA) to help offset high income taxes. In basic terms, an RCA allows an individual to sock away up to half of their salary each year and delay accessing it until retirement, when the individual may well be living somewhere else and paying a far lower tax rate.

“They make tremendous sense,” says Trevor Parry, a national tax estate-planning specialist for Raymond James Ltd. in Toronto. “Every player on the team should have one.” Mr. Parry has put RCAs to work for numerous pro hockey players among the Leaves and Montreal Canadiens.

He has also tried to put them in place for Toronto Raptors basketball players, but the National Basketball Association’s collective bargaining agreement bans the practice. The NBA felt the implementation of RCAs gave the Raptors, the sole franchise outside the United States, “an unfair advantage,” according to Mr. Parry.
https://ca.rbcwealthmanagement.com/docu ... 39321769b9
Although the tax liability without the RCA may be very high, the tax liability with the RCA is lower than if the player were resident in most states playing for a US team. The annual combined US federal, California, Social Security and Medicare tax liability for a player resident in California with compensation of US$6 million would be approximately US$2,947,000. This liability is significantly higher than if the player was a resident in any of the Canadian provinces as illustrated in example 2. Even if the player is a resident of Florida or Texas, the tax liability would be approximately US$2,620,000. This liability is greater than that of all of the provinces with an NHL team.
No reason for fans of Canadian NHL teams to complain about an uneven playing field...
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Carl Yagro
MVP
MVP
Posts: 11955
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: On wide shoulders...

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Carl Yagro »

Evander Kane is no fan of RCAs... neither are his creditors.
The Best GD Canucks Hockey Talk Forum in the World... With Only 18 People!
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by SKYO »

Strangelove wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 1:56 pm
But here's something most of them don't know.

NHL players on Canadian teams have tax advantages available to them that players on American teams do not.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investi ... -canadian/
Financial advisers recommend their high-income clients, such as professional athletes, use a vehicle called a Retirement Compensation Arrangement (RCA) to help offset high income taxes. In basic terms, an RCA allows an individual to sock away up to half of their salary each year and delay accessing it until retirement, when the individual may well be living somewhere else and paying a far lower tax rate.

“They make tremendous sense,” says Trevor Parry, a national tax estate-planning specialist for Raymond James Ltd. in Toronto. “Every player on the team should have one.” Mr. Parry has put RCAs to work for numerous pro hockey players among the Leaves and Montreal Canadiens.
Good shit SL.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Meds »

Since we're now talking about Miller I figured I'd revisit this idea while watching the playoffs and which teams are competing beyond the first round...

Calgary - can roll 4 lines, albeit the 4th line sees limited minutes. What do they look like next year, who gets sacrificed for them to keep Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Mangiapane?

Edmonton - It's McDavid and Draisaitl and not much else. They'll need discounted players now to offset the contracts they've given McD, Leon, and Nurse. Had they drawn any team in the West other than LA for the first round I don't think they are playing right now.

Colorado - What will they look like a year from now when MacKinnon needs to get paid? Or does he take a discount?

St. Louis - They let Pietrangelo walk as an UFA rather than pay him a contract that would hamstring them, they are in the playoffs, Vegas isn't.

Florida - They have a balanced lineup, and the only contract they will regret is Bobrovsky's, and I don't see anyone else on their team coming due for a new deal in the next few years that is going to be a painful signing.

Tampa - Next year is their tell all year. They will have 3 players all earning $9.5M, and Stamkos at $8.5M. They might have a hard time keeping Cernak and Sergachev. But they have shown crazy good depth born of a strong development system. Kucherov would have landed $11.5M on the open market. So we are seeing some discounts on this team, and they are proving that that is how you win Cups.

Carolina - Balanced team, no true superstars that are in that $9.5M club. Room to grow.

NYR - They are in their window for another couple years with this crew, then they will have some tough decisions with Panarin, Zibanejad, Fox, and Trouba, making a combined $37M. Fortunately their starter is on a good contract for another 3 years. Much to Cornuck's chagrin we might be seeing the Rags in the top 10 for a few more seasons.

It feels like unless you are looking at that McDavid or Crosby level talent, where it doesn't matter who you play them with they will score at a 110+ point pace or elevate their linemates goal scoring numbers substantially, you just don't commit the massive money.

I think I'd rather have 3 guys at $8.5M who can all score 85 points with anyone rather than 2 guys at $11M who can score 100 points with anyone.

In the cap world do we need to see a shift where teams start to put much less priority on loyalty to star players and more loyalty to the overall picture that brings organizational success? If homegrown talent won't take a discount to stay and build a winner, then move them out, suffer the backlash of the fans, but reap the rewards of being in the playoffs with a chance to win every year. Stick to it and talented players who actually want to win will come to play for you. The moneypuck approach.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 28935
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Eventually you are going to have to sign one of your top players to a retirement contract as they all come to that eventually around there late 20’s. You just can’t keep showing the door to your top players when they are on the verge of their retirement contract due to fear, paranoia, angst, blah blah blah. You’ll never win a championship with that approach. Now the Senators management is saying “we need veterans, not enough vets on the team. What you need is a very strong balance of your 2 to 3 to 4 over 30 year olds, a strong middle age and a strong youthful element to the team. For my money, Miller is well worth keeping for merely the reason of how competitive and pissy he is and his he hates losing. You don’t let these leader types go. He’s heart and soul man.
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
Ronning's Ghost
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1389
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 5:25 pm
Location: New Westminster

Re: Max Cap Hits

Post by Ronning's Ghost »

Mëds wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 7:18 am In the cap world do we need to see a shift where teams start to put much less priority on loyalty to star players and more loyalty to the overall picture that brings organizational success? If homegrown talent won't take a discount to stay and build a winner, then move them out, suffer the backlash of the fans, but reap the rewards of being in the playoffs with a chance to win every year. Stick to it and talented players who actually want to win will come to play for you. The moneypuck approach.
Chef Boi RD wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 7:33 am Eventually you are going to have to sign one of your top players to a retirement contract as they all come to that eventually around there late 20’s. You just can’t keep showing the door to your top players when they are on the verge of their retirement contract due to fear, paranoia, angst, blah blah blah. You’ll never win a championship with that approach. Now the Senators management is saying “we need veterans, not enough vets on the team. What you need is a very strong balance of your 2 to 3 to 4 over 30 year olds, a strong middle age and a strong youthful element to the team.
For me, this is one of the most interesting hockey management questions. I won't pretend to know the answer, but I'm glad to see it explicitly raised in this format here. It will be intriguing to see which model more closely describes the next few Cup winners, and which is closer to the approach the new Canucks management (/ownership) group takes.

On a perhaps related note, do any of you have strong opinions on what proportion of the cap should be allocated to various specific components of a team (e.g. forward group, defence group, starting goalie, #1 centreman, bottom-pairing defence, etc.), or is that always going to depend on the particulars of what talent a given team has available (and the trade market for that talent)?
Post Reply