Well if Neids doesn’t pay a fine, and the salary doesn’t count against the cap, then were was the penalty for a player just not showing up to training camp to allow their team to bypass the cap?

This seems like a major screw-up by the league.

Posted by Shawn from Calgary on 07/22/08 at 09:20 AM ET

Shawn,

You raise an interesting question, the Ducks retroactively “suspended” Niedermeyer to avoid the cap hit, but now it seems that wasn’t really within the rules. Does Burke and the Ducks now get fined for being over the cap or does this just get swept under the rug because it is Brian Burke doing it.

Is there a capologist and CBA expert out there that knows how this should play out? Were the Ducks over the cap once Niedermeyers fine is properly allocated?

Posted by Hockey1919 from Montreal on 07/22/08 at 09:30 AM ET

looking at the 2007-2008 season at nhlnumbers.com(http://www.nhlnumbers.com/overview.php?team=ANA&season=0708) it seems like the ducks would have been over the 50.3 million dollar cap - at least at some point. Before Ilya Bryzgalov (sp?) was put on waivers and the macdonald-weight trade (which actually saves them a bit on the cap), it seems like they would have been over. According to the site, Scott only hit the cap for 4.1 instead of 6.75. At the end of the season, they had a space of 2.282 with a cushion of 3.1 (im not sure how the cushion is calculated, but assuming it stays roughly the same...). Anyway, the difference in scott’s cap hit exceeds that of their cap space, it seems.

As an aside, I like how it is implicit in the article that tsn.ca has the power to make the league act a certain way.

Posted by underthechestnuttree from LaSalle, Ontario, Canada on 07/22/08 at 09:58 AM ET

You wouldn’t know it from reading the article, but after going through the CBA a bit, it looks like Brooks is right that the fine was unwarranted.

The upper limit of the salary cap is raised by 10% between July 1st and the end of training camp, so the Ducks were within the cap.  The issue would have been after camp, when the cap goes back to normal and the Ducks would have been over.  But you can’t just suspend a player to fit under the cap, so they had to suspend him for missing training camp (breaking the terms of his contract).  The league (and TSN) interpreted that suspension as the Ducks not giving approval for Niedermayer to skip camp.

However, there’s nothing in the CBA that explicitly links the suspension and the fine.  As far as I can tell, that’s why Niedermayer is being refunded.  (And just to clarify, it’s not really a fine--it was to be taken out of whatever future salary he would have earned.  So if he had retired, he wouldn’t have had to pay a cent.)

Definitely a sketchy scenario, but by the book, there didn’t need to be a fine.

Posted by Ryan from Toronto on 07/22/08 at 11:13 AM ET

So why was Scott suspended, if not to ‘cheat’ the cap?

If Burke gave Scott permission to skip training camp and some of the season, where does the suspension come from?

Posted by underthechestnuttree from LaSalle, Ontario, Canada on 07/22/08 at 12:49 PM ET

Simply put, if you are not suspended then your salary counts against the cap and the Ducks were over. Having him sit out to avoid being over until they resolved there cap issue isn’t legal. They tried to “suspend” Niedermeyer, but when it cost him money they had to balk. So he isn’t fined because he was never suspended and the Duck weren’t over the cap, because the NHL chooses to ignore it.

Posted by Hockey1919 from Montreal on 07/22/08 at 02:19 PM ET

I think Hockey1919 nails it on the head. It’s too late to do anything about it, but clearly there was some leeway given to there old boy Burke.

Someone needed to pay from this situation and no one has. Neids gets his cash the ducks evade the cap issues. It’s a win-win from their perspective.

I wonder why this hasn’t got more media attention.

Posted by Shawn from Calgary on 07/22/08 at 02:43 PM ET