MichiganStudent

August 1st, 2009 at 2:47 PM ^

This is awesome. I hope Chicago gets punished for this for no other reason then I am a Wings fan and didn't want Hossa to leave. That being said, would they investigate the recent signings of Franzen and Zetterberg as they are doing Pronger and Hossa? Or are the Wings deals much different then these deals? I think they front loaded Zetterbergs deal and back loaded the Franzen deal to make it work, but I could be wrong.

Jeffro

August 1st, 2009 at 2:54 PM ^

I'm not positive but as far as the NHL cap goes there is no front loading and back loading allowed. Players may receive different numbers annually but the average annual salary of the entire deal is what counts against the cap on a year to year basis. I heard Gary Bettman explain this and basically call out the Red Wings a while back.

YakAttack

August 1st, 2009 at 2:56 PM ^

Although most people point to contracts tendered by the Detroit Red Wings earlier this year to top players like Henrik Zetterberg (12 years) and Johan Franzen (11 years) as other examples of what the league is trying to eradicate, it's believed the NHL has examined those deals and concluded they were negotiated within the spirit of the CBA.

majoturc

August 1st, 2009 at 3:44 PM ^

What jeffro says is correct, it is the average salary of the contract that counts against the cap. From what I understand, in the eyes of the league the difference between Hossa's contract and the Zetterberg/Franzen contracts is the degree to which they work against the spirit of the salary cap rule. Hossa makes 7.9 million per year for the first seven years of his new contract. Because of the rules of the collective bargaining agreement, a player's salary cannot drop by more than a certain percentage from one year to another in a contract. So after those first 7 years, Hossa's salary drops to 4 million in year 8, then to one million and less in the subsequent years, where he earns about 3.5 million total over the last 4 years of his contract. Basically what that means is that Chicago's front office juiced the CBA rules for all they could to get Hossa in at that high 7.9 million salary for as long as possible, then tack on extremely low salaried garbage years to bring the average down to only 5.23 million. In all likelihood, Hossa will retire at the end of those high salaried years or shortly after, leaving both the Blackhawks and Hossa with a sweet deal, a high salary for him, and a low cap hit for them. Because the contract is signed before he turns 35, the rest of his contract is wiped from their cap hit and the Blackhawks have no further obligations after he retires. The other thing that makes it kind of fishy is that the contract goes until he's 42, making the intention of those low salary garbage years all the more obvious. Compared to Zetterberg and Franzen, both of those have contracts that end when they are 40, which isn't quite as suspicious. Combine that with the fact that their salaries drop much more gradually than Hossa's without the steep sudden declines, and their contracts fall into a little bit more of a grey area. Wow, that was a lot longer than I thought it'd be. Basically the point is, yes, we all know why Zetterberg and Franzen's contracts were designed the way they were, but the intent isn't as blatantly obvious as Hossa's, so the Wings are unlikely to face trouble for those two contracts.

lunchboxthegoat

August 1st, 2009 at 3:24 PM ^

I can see the league's point to an extent...However, don't most people consider it good for the game when your superstars are staying put? To me I think leagues like the NBA are retarded because unless you're the elite of the elite you're moving from team to team every 2-3 years.

Jeffro

August 1st, 2009 at 5:31 PM ^

I've always hated the NBA because contact is not allowed. There's no such thing as a clean hit in basketball like in football or hockey. Heck there's better collisions in baseball from the catcher blocking the plate. The little contact that is allowed is about as annoying as dives in the NHL. I do agree that the college game is a lot more exciting then the NBA. Gotta love all the Cinderella George Mason type stories.

Sambojangles

August 1st, 2009 at 4:15 PM ^

I think the ultimate punishment will be when the teams are using up 5 million of their cap space on a 39-40 year old former star player they will be unlikely to be able to get rid of. It's good for now, but I'm sure whoever is the GM of these teams with the front-loaded contracts when they near the end will be wishing the current GMs hadn't made those deals. I'm not mad at Hossa or the Hawks for making the deal, I'm just disappointed Holland couldn't pull his usual magic for him. And I don't think that his deal was especially egregious, or violated the spirit of the rule significantly more than the Mule and Z deals, but I do understand the argument for the other side. I always thought that averaging the cap hit wasn't much of a rule anyway. I don't know for sure, but I think the NBA and NFL salary caps just count the salary for that particular year. If anyone knows more, please explain the other rules better.

lunchboxthegoat

August 1st, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^

IIRC the NFL you can front load or back load contracts. They often do this for rookies I think. They make a minimal amount their first few years but the signing bonus is what makes them their cheddar... however the NFL gives better flexibility...you can renegotiate your deal so that it works better for both sides in the last couple years.

Hannibal.

August 3rd, 2009 at 10:54 AM ^

The NHL is on pretty shaky ground here. It's pretty obvious that the Franzen and Zetterberg contracts are designed to get around the cap limit. In all likelihood. those guys won't be around as soon as their cap space hit exceeds their production level, which will be before those contracts expire. There is no way that the Red Wings are going to keep those guys on the roster when they are 40 and the Wings are taking an $11 Million cap hit on guys who probably won't be scoring more than 15-20 goals. The Hossa contract is just a bit more obvious, but there is no objective measure at work here.