Coming To Chicago This Summer: Cap Reality
For those of you who don't pay much attention to the Western Conference the big news this week was that the Chicago Blackhawks managed to get three of their young stars resigned this week. Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane both signed for 6.3 million per year and Duncan Keith for 5.5 per year. Blackhawk fans were falling all over themselves in self congratulation with the news.
However, the team is going to have to perform "roster reduction surgery" to clear away the foolishness that former GM Tallon committed in the Summer of 2008. This coming summer the Blackhawks are going to have to move a lot of salary just to field a roster of 21 players for the 2010-2011 season. Below is 21 man roster chart of players currently under contract with Chicago and their cap salaries (or Qualifying Offers for RFAs this summer).
A couple of technical notes. RFAs who make under 1 million must be offered a 10% raise in their qualifying offers (which they don't have to sign). Young players on Entry Level Contracts (ELC) will have all bonus money count against the cap next year because it is the final year of the CBA. I have used a 21 man roster instead of the NHL minimum 20 man roster because it is virtually impossible to go with just 20 players. If a guy is out a few days, he doesn't quality for Long Term Injury Replacement, but someone has to to dress--so I budgeted for 21 roster spots. The minimum NHL salary is half a million dollars currently.
OK and now for the really ugly part. If we assume that all of the current Blackhawks RFAs were to simply accept their qualifying offers and no trades were made, then I have Chicago sitting at $66 million in cap hits with a salary cap expected to remain largely unchanged (currently $56.7 million). The team is projected to be over by $8-10 million depending on where the cap is set next season.
| SALARY | FORWARDS | |
| 6.300 | Toews | |
| 6.300 | Kane | |
| 5.275 | Hossa | |
| 3.900 | Sharp | |
| 3.375 | Bolland | |
| 3.083 | Versteeg | |
| 3.000 | Byfuglien | |
| 1.550 | Ladd | RFA Qualifying Offer |
| 1.200 | Kopecky | ELC |
| 1.070 | Eager | RFA Qualifying Offer |
| 1.025 | Brouwer | |
| 0.770 | Fraser | RFA Qualifying Offer |
| DEFENSE | ||
| 7.142 | Campbell | |
| 5.500 | Keith | |
| 3.500 | Seakbook | |
| 3.083 | Barker | |
| 2.333 | Sopel | |
| 0.700 | Hjalmarsson | RFA Qualifying Offer |
| GOAL | ||
| 5.625 | Huet | |
| 0.800 | Crawford | |
| 0.500 | Bench Player |
|
| 66.031 | 2010 TOTAL | |
| 56.700 | Current Cap Max |
|
| 9.331 | Difference |
Ch-ch-changes
The good news for Blackhawk fans is that their young core players were signed last week. The bad news is that several current members of a Cup-contending squad will have to be traded this summer. Let's play amateur GM and see how this works out.
The non-Campbell, non-Huet Scenario
Let's assume that both the Campbell and Huet contracts are too costly to move. In this situation the Hawks need to deal away 4 guys making some serious coin. If they moved Cam Barker ($3.08 million), Dave Bolland ($3.375) and Dustin Byfuglien ($3.0) and replaced them with three players averaging just $0.700 a piece that still leaves the team $2 million over the current cap. Assuming the cap doesn't rise, they would need to a) move either Versteeg or Sharp; or b) exchange their entire checking group (Kopecky, Eager, Brouwer and Fraser) for 4 guys making the NHL minimum. This scenario involves the most carnage for the existing lineup of skaters, as it would essentially gut the team's depth.
The Campbell Traded Scenario
The two most egregious contracts are those given to Brian Campbell (7.142 million) and Christobal Huet (5.625 million). To move either of this contracts Chicago would probably have to include either a 1st round pick or a top prospect to make another team swallow either of them. Let's suppose that Chicago was able to swing Campbell + 1st round pick to Dallas for a pick or prospect. If Cam Barker moves into the top 4 D for Chicago, and a journeyman making .6 million fills Campbell's roster spot, that still leaves them $2.8 over the cap. To clear that much more salary they would have to swap a player making $3.3 million for a guy making the league minimum or basically Dave Bolland or Patrick Sharp.
The Huet Traded Scenario
Most teams only have one starting goalie--there are only so many starting jobs around the NHL. Few teams can afford afford to lavish All-Star money on a non-All Star talent, which means that the Cristobal Huet contract is probably tougher to move than the Campbell contract. But let's suppose for a moment that Chicago can find a taker. Who would take Huet's place? That's a key question and one that is hard to predict. Almost any starter of any quality is going to have a cap hit of $3 million or more. The team might find a cheaper option such as Theodore, Biron or Emery on the UFA market, but those cheaper options come with a serious downside risk. Let's assume that the Blackhawks go very cheap at the goal position and only spend $2.5 on Huet's replacement. That still leaves them $6 million over the cap. Trading away Barker ($3.08), Sopel ($2.3) and one medium priced forward (perhaps Bolland $3.0) and replacing them with players making just $700,000 gets them under the cap with some money for a Hjalmarsson raise.
The Dream Scenario: Campbell and Huet Traded
The least disruptive solution to the Blackhawks depth would be to move both fat contracts next summer. The biggest question is whether they can find any suckers (call Bob Gainey?) or whether they are willing to part with high draft picks or top prospect Kyle Beach to purchase cap space. Assuming that they can make these two ugly contracts vanish and replace the D slot with a cheap defenseman, that would leave about $2-3 million for a starting goalie. This is easily the least disruptive scenario for the current roster--but presumably would come at the cost of future talent (picks and prospects).
Concluding Thoughts
Trying to game plan the future is always challenging. At this point, we have no idea what the final cap number will be (but attendance is flat and tickets are being discounted in many cities). We also have no way of knowing if RFAs like Ladd and Hjalmarsson will demand more money than their qualifying offers. Despite these "known unknowns" I've tried to get a sense of how things might play out this summer in the Windy City.
0 recs |
7 comments
|
Comments
Obviously they will do nothing this year and make this the drive for the cup year. In the off season they will look to move contracts but what are the alternatives if there are no takers? Waiving Sople makes sense but still leaves them well over the cap number. At what date do the Blackhawks have to have this resolved, is it this off season or next year at the date they could exceed the cap? What are the ramifications if they go over?
They could waive players like Sharp and Bufglen and lose them without any compensation or it there are no takers (there will be) bring them back through re-entry waivers and pick up half the cost which still does not solve the problem. It is also horrible asset management to lose those type players without getting anything in return.
This is a huge mess both for the Hawks but also for the league.
by Thrashfan01 on Dec 6, 2009 11:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Blackhawks will not hit crisis mode until the deadline for RFA contracts begins to hit. During the summer a team is allowed to exceed the cap by 10% so they only need to be under $61 million approximately. They could bury these contracts in the AHL too, but if they try to bring any of these players up the re-entry waivers could prove very costly.
All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
by The Falconer on Dec 6, 2009 3:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’m more intrigued with how they plan on moving these contracts. If the cap goes down (likely), who can afford to take on a Huet or Campbell contract? Other teams are going to be in the same or similar situations, trying to free up some cap space. You also have to consider internal caps like the Thrashers. Sure, they could take on a Huet-ish type contract, but they don’t need him. If Kovy stays, you have that raise. Kozlov may be done, but his contract would basically cover Kovy’s raise, so that’s a wash. Little gets a raise, Armstrong (if he stays). Peverly adds another million. Pavelec is sure to get another ~2 million. Afinogenov will probably be offered a 2-3 year contract that will surely be above that 800k he’s making this year. Then you have Kubina, and a goalie. Hopefully Kari is dumped (sorry Kari fans), but you still need a backup. It all adds up and I think Atlanta is unwilling to take on such contracts.
Campbell is another story. He’s gotta be moved this summer, and early as he has a NTC that he can waive for 8 teams of his choosing. So not only does Chicago have to find a team willing to take his contract, but they also have to find one he agrees with. This is going to be similar to the Heatley situation this summer. Problem is, Campbell is no Heatley, but is making roughly the same amount. Yikes.
by EvilMilkshake on Dec 6, 2009 11:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I suppose we could take Campbell and Sharp for the rights to a young, oft-injured goalie. Please?
I’m not sure how bad “the resolution” will be for Chicago, but desperation is never a good position in the trading room.
by timmyf on Dec 6, 2009 2:41 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
q
what is the ramification(s) if a team gets to/beyond the deadline and they are over the cap? do they cease operations? pay a steep fine? does the NHL take away players of their choosing? how does that work?
by wax_house on Dec 6, 2009 10:47 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
During the season the NHL office will simply refuse any transaction that puts a team over the cap. So if they were to make a trade or call up a guy from the minors and had no room the NHL will void the transaction. The League Office monitors this extremely carefully.
What is unknown is how they would handle the end of summer deadline. Teams are allowed to exceed the cap up to 10% during the summer but have to get under the cap (I think around training camp time). I don’t know how they would force a team to get under at that point.
All things Thrashers + stats: www.birdwatchersanonymous.com
by The Falconer on Dec 6, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve scoured the CBA trying to figure out the ramifications for exceeding the cap and have never been able to find them. Given there are lots of other things I haven’t found in the CBA, I’d love to know what the “other” rulebook is that GMs and the League turn to (for example, I’ve never been able to reconcile the amount of bonuses on an ELC to the parameters set forth in the CBA).
All I can say is I am so glad that Campbell is Chicago’s problem and not ours. Best deal that never got made. That difference between him and Hainsey will be huge if we presume Kovy is staying and factor in that players like Bogosian and Kane aren’t going to be cheap forever.
by WINGZ_25 on Dec 7, 2009 7:20 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 

























