Scrolling Marquee with text links

Monday, December 11, 2006

Note: Bondra Signing

Just for those who are curious to the number of Bondra's deal. $500,000 plus incentives. The incentives will count against the cap according to the CBA, which I disagree with.

12 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

disagree with???? there would be no cap if incentives didnt count..

here is an example. the bruins could have signed chara for the league minimum and then given him an incentive laced contract that say gave him a 7 million per season bonus for playing 1 game.

not only do incentives count against the cap....it would be idiotic for them not to.

your friend neb

7:57 PM  
Blogger Joe Murphy said...

Yeah I do not understand the whole incentive thing with regards to the salary cap. If the player does not earn them, how and why do they count against the cap?

8:02 PM  
Blogger Matt said...

I thought of that Neb, but here is why I counter. Why would a player sign for incentives? If a team were willing to guarantee 7.5 instead of incentives, Chara would pick the guaranteed. It's like MLB, a player could sign for league minimum all the time, but why would he?

8:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well in Bondra's case (and most veterans in similar positions) the team is taking a chance on him. $500,000 is good money for the amount of games he is playing and his age. If he proves to be worth signing by meeting his incentive obligations, then both parties win.

It has to count towards the cap because otherwise like neb said everyone could sign low and collect easy money. If the player doesn't meet their incentives Boston keeps their money.

Nobody knows if a player will meet their incentive requirements until the end of the season Joe, that is why.

Matt we don't see incentives all the time because most players will play up to or around their salary. When they get older (or high ranked rookies) there is a greater risk for the team carrying them. If Bondra sucks then they only lost 500,000.

10:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

lets see... if chara could earn the same amount of money while circumventing the cap allowing his team to sign every top free agent.... lets see, why wouldnt he...o and by the way detriot and ny rangers already did this and ruined the league....oops!

11:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Really?
I am at a loss.
He explained it, already. You HAVE to count them. Matt- a team can only guarantee 7.5 to a player or two, right? Even then, you are banking your whole team on these two guys.....

well, if you tell the top 6 unrestricted free agents this year that you will sign them all to 2 million dollar deals, and if they play one game a piece, they will get 7.5 million a piece, these guys will all want to play for you, you have the best team money can buy, and you will have beat the system.

3:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

also...matt there can be no comparison to the MLB where there IS NO CAP!!!!

10:03 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

Ok I understand, but Nevets there has to be some limit on bonus's such as socring 40 goals or getting 100 assists or being +30 after the season. There has to be langauge for the bonus's the NHL sets. As for the MLB cap, that is irreveant, the luxury tax acts like that to anyteam except the Yanks. The point I was saying is, the more GUARANTEED MONEY OFFEREED the more likely the player would take it.

5:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ok let me get this straight... matt says he cant understand how the nhl can count bonus's againt the cap, but now wants to tell the teams what bonus's they can give and the language they can use.....
are you serious? tell me you are just joking?

if you believe the luxury tax is anyway related to a cap you are out of your gord. see how they are called different things? that means they are not at all the same.

ok matt lets put this in terms you "might" understand.. someone offers you a "guaranted" 100 dollars to advertise here at your site. or he offers you 10 dollars and 10 dollars for every visitor at your site. which do you take?

8:29 PM  
Blogger Matt said...

I am saying that the bonus's would have to be on injured players coming back or a specific language stating a plateau of a certain number for a rookie would be the only ones allowed. What I was trying to say, a team should have a cap hit of the money they are paying. So if a bonus of 5 million isn't achieved, the bonus does not count against the cap, if it is achieved, then the bonus does count against the cap.

9:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I want to know how can you know in advance if someone is going to achieve a bonus or not?

Do you think teams would take a risk of going over the cap because they were betting that someone wouldnt make a bonus?

I think you end up with the teams messing this up big time under your plan.

Or you probably think they could control themselves?

Truefully they spent over a year and a lost season hammering this deal and the particulars out with a small army worth of laywers. And now you say you "disagree" with thier handling of bonus money but your solution doesnt make any sense, perhaps you should have tried to step in sooner to fix this up......

7:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I understand what you are saying matt, but yuo can't be sure someone will meet his bonuses until the end of the season.

If the league did it the way you are saying then teams could sign extra players, and if they met the bonuses at the end of the season they would all of sudden go over the cap. The problem there is obvious, what the hell do you do to the team if it went over the cap after the season is over? I guess the league could shrink their cap soace the next season, further resticting the team from signing players.

10:02 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Website Counter