Sabres have made it a Top Priority to Re-Sign Linus Ullmark per Friedman

[Thorner]

17 hours ago, Brawndo said:

I’d be surprised if it doesn’t happen 

This is great news.

Now just find one more. 

[Curt]

32 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Wrong.

Signing bonuses were still allowed under the old CBA (Article 50.2.b) and are addressed and allowed on page 60 of the MOU.

Sorry, yes, signing bonuses exist.

The type of signing bonus described in the post I responded to does not though.

$10M upfront signing bonus on a $4Mish contract is not allowable under the current CBA.  There are limits on how large they can be, because the total salary of any given year can only differ from the AAV by a max of 50%.

Is that 100% correct and complete?

[Thorner]

16 hours ago, dudacek said:

If this gets done it's because certain tone/parameters were set back in the fall when Linus signed his one-year deal, and both sides are following through like gentlemen on that. I'd never have any doubt about Linus in that equation.

They HAVE to value him highly if they thought he could make up for what we'd be getting from the rest of the position

16 hours ago, Curt said:

This is probably good news.  The Sabres need stability and Linus can provide that.  I do worry about goalie term, but something something necessary evils.

Always choose the lesser of two weevils

Edited April 11, 2021 by Thorny

[Thorner]

14 hours ago, darksabre said:

I think they'll get it done for around 4.5 for maybe 4 years. I can't see it being less than 4 years, but I can't see the money being more than 5 per. 

Does that equate to goalie purgatory being over?

[Curt]

2 minutes ago, Thorny said:

They HAVE to value him highly if they thought he could make up for what we'd be getting from the rest of the position

Always choose the lesser of two weevils

In the British Royal Navy, yes of course.

[Norcal]

21 minutes ago, Taro T said:

But, there is very little likelihood Ullmark is signing a 2 year deal & if he doesn't re-sign then the Sabres need to bring in 2 goalies rather than just 1.  Which is a recipe for their struggles to continue.

Fix the goaltending & get the C spine to a point that they can handle the inevitable Eichel injury & this team makes the playoffs.  Even in this awful season, give them last year's Eichel from day 1 & 1 of AZ's, Columbus', or Calgary's goalies to platoon with Ullmark & they're really in the mix if not on the inside looking out.

The only concern with a longer term is injury or team struggles.

They should still target Merzlikins and Rittich this off season for next year. 

[Broken Ankles]

42 minutes ago, Curt said:

Sorry, yes, signing bonuses exist.

The type of signing bonus described in the post I responded to does not though.

$10M upfront signing bonus on a $4Mish contract is not allowable under the current CBA.  There are limits on how large they can be, because the total salary of any given year can only differ from the AAV by a max of 50%.

Is that 100% correct and complete?

Where is the language in the CBA that describes the bold?  There were numerous contracts signed (Draisaitl, Matthew’s and even Jack) that have 90% of the compensation as signing bonus with minimal salary ($1m).  It’s paid over the course of a few years, but it’s very advantageous to the player in terms of protection against a lock out or buyout.  A signing bonus cannot be factored in to the 2/3’s buyout and is payable regardless of a lock out, if were one to occur in 2024. 

https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-players-planning-lockout-signing-bonuses/

 

[Curt]

1 minute ago, Broken Ankles said:

Where is the language in the CBA that describes the bold?  There were numerous contracts signed (Draisaitl, Matthew’s and even Jack) that have 90% of the compensation as signing bonus with minimal salary ($1m).  It’s paid over the course of a few years, but it’s very advantageous to the player in terms of protection against a lock out or buyout.  A signing bonus cannot be factored in to the 2/3’s buyout and is payable regardless of a lock out, if were one to occur in 2024. 

https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-players-planning-lockout-signing-bonuses/

 

Its the year to year income that can’t differ from the AAV by more than 50%.  It doesn’t matter whether that income is bonuses or regular salary.

So, in the example I was responding to, you can’t give Ullmark a deal with a  $4-5M AAV, but $10M of it as an up front signing bonus.  With a $4M AAV, the max he can make in one season is $6M, the least is $2M.

[Taro T]

4 minutes ago, Broken Ankles said:

Where is the language in the CBA that describes the bold?  There were numerous contracts signed (Draisaitl, Matthew’s and even Jack) that have 90% of the compensation as signing bonus with minimal salary ($1m).  It’s paid over the course of a few years, but it’s very advantageous to the player in terms of protection against a lock out or buyout.  A signing bonus cannot be factored in to the 2/3’s buyout and is payable regardless of a lock out, if were one to occur in 2024. 

https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-players-planning-lockout-signing-bonuses/

 

He's wrong again because he is going under the mistaken assumption that a signing bonus will necessarily get paid in the 1st year of the contract.  While that seems a reasonable assumption, this is the NHL & is not the case.  Signing bonuses can be paid in any year the contract is in effect.  But the total of the payout in that year has to comport with the rules.

[Curt]

4 minutes ago, Taro T said:

He's wrong again because he is going under the mistaken assumption that a signing bonus will necessarily get paid in the 1st year of the contract.  While that seems a reasonable assumption, this is the NHL & is not the case.  Signing bonuses can be paid in any year the contract is in effect.  But the total of the payout in that year has to comport with the rules.

I understand this, but the comment I responded to was describing a scenario in which Ullmark is given a $10M upfront bonus.

But whatever.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Guys, guys ... I was just making a point to pay the man good $ and to ensure reasonable term and contract $ give him some upfront in exchange for a bit of a discount.

No one really cares that much how the CBA works.

EDIT TO ADD:

*(insert winkie - winkie thingie here)

Edited April 11, 2021 by New Scotland (NS)
I am an idiot ... GOODLY!!

[Taro T]

2 hours ago, Curt said:

Its the year to year income that can’t differ from the AAV by more than 50%.  It doesn’t matter whether that income is bonuses or regular salary.

So, in the example I was responding to, you can’t give Ullmark a deal with a  $4-5M AAV, but $10M of it as an up front signing bonus.  With a $4M AAV, the max he can make in one season is $6M, the least is $2M.

No, a contract that pays out $4, $4, $2, $6, $6.5, $5, $3, & $1.5 would have a $4 average and would be acceptable.

 

3 hours ago, Curt said:

Sorry, yes, signing bonuses exist.

The type of signing bonus described in the post I responded to does not though.

$10M upfront signing bonus on a $4Mish contract is not allowable under the current CBA.  There are limits on how large they can be, because the total salary of any given year can only differ from the AAV by a max of 50%.

Is that 100% correct and complete?

No, it is not 100% correct & complete. 😉

For front loaded deals, the annual decrease in compensation can't be more than 25% of that 1st year's compensation & the total AAV has to be at least 60% of the deal.  (Revised from 35% and 50% in the CBA respectively.)

For non-front loaded deals total annual compensation can't increase from the previous year by more than the lower of the 1st 2 years compensation nor decrease from the previous year by more than 50% of that lower of the 1st 2 year's salary.  (And the example worked even though $6.5 is more than 150% of the AAV because the maximum annual bump was $4 & the max annual decrease was $2. 😉 )

A player can get a monster signing bonus, it simply can't be entirely payable that 1st year.  And that is why cutting Okposo this off-season still leaves him w/ a $5MM cap hit that year as he gets a $2MM signing bonus in his $4 MM total compensation. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by Taro T
Bolded corrected a typo

[Curt]

49 minutes ago, Taro T said:

No, a contract that pays out $4, $4, $2, $6, $6.5, $5, $3, & $1.5 would have a $4 average and would be acceptable.

 

No, it is not 100% correct & complete. 😉

For front loaded deals, the annual decrease in compensation can't be more than 25% of that 1st year's compensation & the total AAV has to be at least 60% of the deal.  (Revised from 25% and 50% in the CBA respectively.)

For non-front loaded deals total annual compensation can't increase from the previous year by more than the lower of the 1st 2 years compensation nor decrease from the previous year by more than 50% of that lower of the 1st 2 year's salary.  (And the example worked even though $6.5 is more than 150% of the AAV because the maximum annual bump was $4 & the max annual decrease was $2. 😉 )

A player can get a monster signing bonus, it simply can't be entirely payable that 1st year.  And that is why cutting Okposo this off-season still leaves him w/ a $5MM cap hit that year as he gets a $2MM signing bonus in his $4 MM total compensation. 

😳🧐

Thank you!

[bob_sauve28]

1 hour ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Guys, guys ... I was just making a point to pay the man good $ and to ensure reasonable term and contract $ give him some upfront in exchange for a bit of a discount.

No one really cares that much how the CBA works.

EDIT TO ADD:

*(insert winkie - winkie thingie here)

You sure started something! 

[Curt]

2 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

You sure started something! 

Yup, the nerdiest polite dispute you’ll ever see on a hockey forum.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Curt

[PerreaultForever]

3 hours ago, Norcal said:

The only concern with a longer term is injury or team struggles.

They should still target Merzlikins and Rittich this off season for next year. 

Merzlikins yes, Riitich no. 

[Norcal]

23 minutes ago, PerreaultForever said:

Merzlikins yes, Riitich no. 

Fair enough

[MODO Hockey]

If they somehow can prove to Linus that they honestly believe in him he will stay and prove to all what he has been fighting for all these years down in the mudd.

He will grant this org a cup

[mjd1001]

I think Ulmark is good. Above average.  For sure a goalie good enough to win with, but not someone you win BECAUSE of despite a bad team around him (at least long term).  he's good enough to steal some games for you though.

I'd want him back but not at 'any' cost.

[Scottysabres]

44 minutes ago, MODO Hockey said:

If they somehow can prove to Linus that they honestly believe in him he will stay and prove to all what he has been fighting for all these years down in the mudd.

He will grant this org a cup

I concur. 

[LGR4GM]

Unconfirmed rumors Ullmark will test free agency

[PromoTheRobot]

1 minute ago, LGR4GM said:

Unconfirmed rumors Ullmark will test free agency

Source? If that is the case then just move him Monday.

Edited April 11, 2021 by PromoTheRobot

[LGR4GM]

Just now, PromoTheRobot said:

Source?

 

[Brawndo]

If this is true, you have to move him 

[LGR4GM]

1 minute ago, Brawndo said:

If this is true, you have to move him