All week long, the NHL and the NHLPA have been hammering things out. As part of that hammering, it had been rumored for months that, after the revenue loss when the NHL suspended its regular season’s games on March 12, teams might be allowed to engage an amnesty or compliance buyout to help negotiate a stagnant salary cap.
However, according to hockey insider Bob McKenzie (whose fingers are probably sore from his constant tweeting over the past few days), the two sides have not discussed amnesty or compliance buyouts in the details of their negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
Related: Get Ready Calgary Flames Fans: Jarome Iginla Will Be Named to the Hockey Hall of Fame
There’re No Amnesty Buyouts on the Horizon
Although many fans and hockey commentators might want it, the return-to-play criteria and extended CBA aren’t likely to include an amnesty clause. At least, so says TSN’s McKenzie.
Seeing all sorts of speculative chatter amongst fans discussing possibility of new CBA amnesty buyouts to help clubs manage flat cap. Amnesty buyouts are NOT part of agreement. They might make a GM’s life easier but wouldn’t help owners/players navigate their troubled economy.
— Bobby Margarita (@TSNBobMcKenzie) July 2, 2020
When it was learned that the salary cap would remain at a flat $81.5 million for the next two seasons, there came some speculation that the stagnant cap could be augmented by an amnesty provision. However, it now appears teams will be stuck with the contracts they’ve signed and have on their books.
An amnesty buyout was a hope by some that a team would be allowed a single get-out-of-jail card that would work to erase a bad contract without penalty. That would help navigate a salary cap that, as Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman tweeted, would lay out over the next three years as such:
Seeking Relief From a Bad Contract
In essence, general managers who signed what have proven to be bad contracts – the Vancouver Canucks immediately spring to mind, with the six-year, $36 million contract the team signed with Loui Eriksson signed in 2016 – might be in trouble when it comes to their rosters.
If so, most would be forced to find creative ways to dump salary. Some teams would lose good players and others would have to find salary-cap loopholes to build a roster.
Related: Could Braden Holtby Wind Up With Calgary Flames?
The Case of the Calgary Flames Milan Lucic
For the Calgary Flames, Milan Lucic has one of those contracts. At least, so wrote Todd Cordell of Hockey Buzz. Lucic still has three years on his deal worth $5.25 million per season. Once a feared player and the very definition of a power forward, these days the 32-year-old Lucic is no longer contributing much to the team’s offense. This past season – his first in Calgary – he scored only eight goals and 12 assists (20 points) in 68 games. That’s a far cry from what he had produced with the Boston Bruins in his heyday.
The Flames owe Lucic three more seasons of salary. He contributes as a third-line player, at times even showing some of the strength that carried him previously. But $15.75 million over three seasons would buy more scoring than he’s producing. And, he’s unlikely to find the fountain of youth any time soon.
Lucic’s seasons of scoring between 40 and 60 points certainly seem to be in his rearview mirror. Perhaps over a short play-in series during a postseason that often is more physical than the regular season, Lucic can have an impact.
But $5 million plus – well, that’s a lot of impact. It’s hard to think that the Lucic has it in him any longer. And, for the Flames, there will be no amnesty from that fact.
