The Rangers’ performance bonus issue gets complicated

Performance bonuses are a good problem to have and the New York Rangers have that problem

While having a slew of young players on the roster helps a team keep under the salary cap, there are issues especially when those young players are some of the best in the NHL.  We’ve discussed the issue of performance bonuses before and how it could be an issue for the New York Rangers as they manage their salary cap next season. With the addition of Alexis Lafrenière it got a lot more complicated.

To summarize, players on Entry Level Contracts (ELC’s) can be paid a maximum of $950k, but teams can supplement that with performance bonuses to a maximum of $2.85 million more.  That’s great for the player, but any performance bonus money earned counts against the salary cap and that is the issue.

While the salary cap is a hard $81.5 million, the NHL doesn’t hold it against teams if they are over the cap due to performance bonuses. They are allowed an overage of 7.5% more than the cap for bonus payments.  That means that the Rangers could be over the salary cap by $6,112,500 in performance bonus payouts.  It’s called the “Bonus Cushion.”

Here’s where it gets complicated. If the Rangers pay out more than $6.1 million in performance bonuses, it counts against their 2020-21 salary cap of $81.5 million.  For example, if they pay $10 million in performance bonuses, $3.9 million would count against the salary cap.

Since performance bonuses are not paid until the end of the season, teams are never sure of how much they will have to ante up.  As a result, if a team goes over the cap because of performance bonuses, they are hit with a “Bonus Cushion Penalty.”   The penalty reduces the salary cap for the next season by the amount that a team is over.  So, if the Rangers exceed the Bonus Cushion by several million dollars, it reduces their salary cap in 2021-22 by that much.

Of course, that is if the team has no salary cap space when the season ends.  If team can absorb the overage within the $81.5 million, there is no penalty the next season.

Vince Mercogliano of Lohud.com did a story laying out the salary cap issues and opined that a big payout of performance bonuses to young Ranger players could mean that the team will not promote some players to the NHL roster to keep their performance bonus exposure to a minimum.   That  could mean that we won’t see Vitali Kravtsov, Morgan Barron or K’Andre Miller in a Ranger uniform because they could earn performance bonus money that will hit the salary cap.

The Rangers’ bonus situation

While all of this speculation is valid, it is based on one fact, that the team will pay out the maximum in performance bonuses.  Realistically, that won’t happen.

The team has $13,200,000 in performance bonuses built into their roster for 16 players.  Seven of those players should automatically make the Rangers NHL roster next season and their total performance bonus exposure is $10,062,500.   Here’s that group:

• Alexis Lafrenière  $2,850,000
• Igor Shesterkin: $2,850,000
• Kaapo Kakko:  $2,650,000
• Adam Fox:  $850,000
• Filip Chytil:  $350,000
• Julien Gauthier:  $300,000
• Ryan Lindgren:  $212,500

The key question is how realistic is the possibility that these young players will max out on their performance bonuses.  The answer is that if they have good season, the odds are strong.

Here are players due performance bonuses money who could possibly make the team:

• Vitali Kravtsov:  $850,000
• Morgan Barron:  $850,000
• Justin Richards:  $500,000
• K’Andre Miller:  $300,000
• Tarmo Reunanen: $132,500
• Austin Reuschhoff: $107,500

How realistic is a big performance bonus payout?  It’s worth taking a look at performance bonus targets:

Performance bonus targets

Performance bonuses are broken down into two categories.  Category A bonuses are for hitting team targets and each category pays a maximum of $212,500.  The most a player can make is $850k, meaning that the player has to achieve four of the targets to make the maximum. Here are the targets for a forward:

• Top six forward on the team in average ice time
• 20 goals
• 35 assists
• 60 points
• .73 points per game average
• Top three forwards in plus/minus on the team
• End-of-Season NHL All-Rookie Team
• NHL All-Star Game (selected to play or plays)
• NHL All-Star Game MVP

Category B bonuses are for league-wide  recognition and max out at $2 million. All of the targets are laid out in the CBA.

• Top 5 in balloting for Hart, Norris, Vezina, Selke or Richard  Trophies
• Top 3 in balloting for Lady Byng
• Jennings Trophy winner
• Top 3 in balloting for Calder Trophy
• 1st or 2nd Team All-Star
• Conn Smythe Trophy winner
• Top ten in the NHL in goals, assists, points or points per game

While we don’t know what specific targets are in each player’s contract or how much a player would be paid for each, there is one example that reveals how bonus payments are structured.  That would be Connor McDavid.

Igor Shesterkin

We will lead off with Shesterkin because he is the most likely to achieve most if not all of his targets.

Here are the Category A performance bonus targets for a goalie ($212,500 each):

• 1,800 minutes minimum (30 games)
• Goals against average (GAA): A lower GAA than the median average of all goalies who play 25 of more regular season games.
• Save Percentage (Sv%): A lower Sv% than the median average of all goalies who play 25 of more regular season games.
• 20 wins
• Shutouts: More shutouts than the median average of all goalies who play 25 of more regular season games.
• End-of-Season NHL All-Rookie Team
• NHL All-Star Game (selected to play or plays)
• NHL All-Star Game MVP

Here are the Category B performance bonus targets for a goalie ($2 million each):

• Top 5 in balloting for Hart, Jennings or Vezina Trophies
• Top 3 in balloting for Lady Byng
• Jennings Trophy winner
• Top 3 in balloting for Calder Trophy
• 1st or 2nd Team All-Star
• Conn Smythe Trophy winner
• Top 5 in GAA
• Top 5 in Sv%
• Top 5 in wins

If Shesterkin plays the way he is expected, based on his 12 game debut last season, he should easily achieve many of his Category A targets and could have a shot at the Vezina or Calder Trophies in Category B along with the statistical targets.

The performance bonus exposure for Shesterkin is definitely $850k, but he has to be a Calder  Trophy candidate or finish as one of the top five goalies in the league to get the additional $2 million.  Looking at Shesterkin, he will make either $850k or the full $2.85 million.

Alexis Lafrenière

Lafrenière  is a total intangible.  If he is as good as he is supposed to be, even if he begins the season on the third line, how likely is he to hits these bonus targets?

Category A targets ($212,500 each)

• Top six forward on the team in average ice time
• 20 goals
• 35 assists
• 60 points
• .73 points per game average
• Top three forward in plus/minus
• NHL All-Rookie team selection
• NHL All-Star  Game selection

Here are the category B targets for a forward ($2 million each):

• Top 5 in balloting for Hart, Richard, Smythe or Selke Trophies
• Top 3 in balloting for Lady Byng
• Top 3 in balloting for Calder Trophy
• 1st or 2nd Team All-Star
• Conn Smythe Trophy winner
• Top 10 in goals
• Top 10 in assists
• Top 10 in points
• Top 10 in points per game average

It’s impossible to project where Lafrenière  will end up.  Most predictions have him ending up with over 20 goals and about 60 points. If he does, he will end up making most if not all of his bonus money.

Kaapo Kakko

While Kakko had a disappointing rookie season, he still has the potential to make a boatload of cash in performance bonuses. He will have to improve immensely in practically every category and a key factor will be where he plays in the lineup.  If Kakko ends up as a top six forward, replacing Jesper Fast on the line with Strome and Panarin, he could have a much better year.  The simple fact is that he will improve in his second year, but will it be enough to get him a big bonus payout?

Why it won’t affect roster decisions

Mercogliano’s argument that bonus payment exposure will keep players like Barron, Kravtsov and Miller doesn’t really apply.  Combined, the performance bonus payments for these three total $2 million.  It’s likely that Barron and Miller will start the season in Hartford anyway.  It’s likely that the Rangers will let Kravtsov play most of the KHL season.   If they do not play a full season in New York, they would have a hard time hitting any of their statistical bonus targets.

Think about it.  If Miller is tearing up the AHL and is deemed ready to play in the NHL, would the Rangers keep him in the minor leagues just because of how he affects the salary cap?   if Kravtsov plays to his potential would $850k in performance bonus exposure keep him from the major league roster?

Where it does affect the team is in how they manage the cap.  Remember that it’s where the team is cap-wise at the trade deadline that matters. They can still make moves at the trade deadline to reduce salary.  One simple way of managing the cap would be to maintain a smaller roster than the league maximum.  Teams are allowed up to 23 players and they all count against the cap.  The Rangers could reduce the NHL roster to 21 players (12 forwards, seven defensemen, two goalies) and only those salaries would count against the cap.

The Rangers cap issues have been well documented and the performance bonus issue is nothing new.  13 NHL teams will be carrying salary cap overages into the 2020-21 season.  Dallas leads the way with almost $3 million with the Flyers on the low end at $66,037.  Note that for Dallas their bonus payouts weren’t for ELC players but for veterans like Corey Perry.

Because the Blueshirts were under the cap, they have no issues next season.

What is pretty much a given is that the team will head into 2021-22 with a salary cap overage, the only question is how much.   It could be the entire $6.1 million or much less if they can manage the cap or if the players don’t hit their targets.    What that means is that the windfall that Rangers fans have been expecting in a year when the buyout hit drops from $13 million to $4 million and  Brendan Smith departs will be offset somewhat by a cap overage that could result in $3.9 million in dead money against their salary cap.

What does it all mean?

The salary cap looms over every decision the team will make, but it shouldn’t prevent the Rangers from icing the best possible team. It’s well known that teams need fans in the seats and playoff revenue is pure gravy.  If bringing Vitali Kravtsov over from the KHL to help the team make the postseason is what they need to do, it will happen.

What you won’t see is any more free agent signings unless the team sheds salary.   Any salary additions have to be offset by reductions.

What is for sure is that it is in the Rangers’ best interests to see Lafrenière, Kakko, Shesterkin and any other Ranger prospects max out on their bonus payments.  That would mean all-star level seasons for these players and that could mean a deep postseason run.

While Jeff Gorton has to be managing his roster with the salary cap constraints in mind, he will also cross his cap bridges when he comes to them.  The good news is the Rangers are not over the cap, unlike some of their competitors.  There are at least ten teams in the NHL that are going to have to  basically give away players in order to get under the cap.

We’ve already seen it, starting with Marc Staal’s trade to Detroit.  The Islanders had to give up Devon Toews for two picks.  The Golden Knights surrendered Nate Schmidt for a third rounder.   This is only a beginning.  The next shoe to drop will be when teams walk away from RFA’s who have won big awards in arbitration.

Historically, Jeff Gorton has waited to make moves when he needed to.  Whether it was swapping Jimmy Vesey for a third round pick to make cap room for Artemi Panarin or giving Vlad Namestnikov to Ottawa for Nick Ebert and a fourth round pick or trading Brady Skjei at the deadline, Gorton will bide his time and make the moves when he has to.

As we said at the beginning of this post, it’s a good problem to have, complicated, but good.