+- Simulation Hockey League (https://simulationhockey.com)
+-- Forum: Community (https://simulationhockey.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Forum: Announcements (https://simulationhockey.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=24)
+---- Forum: Suspensions/Punishments (https://simulationhockey.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=226)
+---- Thread: TOR Cap Overage (/showthread.php?tid=139564)
TOR Cap Overage - Frenchie - 10-23-2024
Good morning SHL,
It was brought to the attention of Head Office that the Toronto North Stars began the season with several players not under contract. While investigating this/deliberating on appropriate disciplinary measures (the rulebook currently does not specify a consequence for rostering players not under contract, so we needed time to discuss and research precedent), Toronto was instructed to sign those players in order to play them legally.
It was determined during this investigation that, due to contract tier adjustments, Toronto would not have been able to legally sign those players (players who had already begun the season on Toronto’s roster and had played a full week of sims), as they would not have had the cap space to do so. While calculating this, we also discovered that TOR had been assessed a fine (for releasing an active player) that was $500,000 higher than it should have been. When all the math was said and done, the final cap overage was calculated at $5,000,000.
In accordance with the rulebook (Section II, Subsection C, Rule 6), Toronto will be issued a fine of $10,000,000 (twice the surplus) towards next season’s cap (S80).
Ordinarily, Toronto would be required to rectify this situation prior to the next sim, but due to the late hour at which this was determined/finalized and the GMs were able to be notified, as well as the early sim time for this day's sim, TOR will be given 24 hours from the time of this post to become cap compliant.
As always, Toronto (@mcgriddleluver and @jaypc8237) may appeal this decision and can send an appeal request to any head of the appeals committee, currently @DrunkenTeddy and @Leafs4ever. Any appeal should be filed within 48 hours of publication of this punishment.
On behalf of SHL HO,
Frenchie
RE: TOR Cap Overage - ZootTX - 10-23-2024
That's a lot of dollars!
RE: TOR Cap Overage - Seany148 - 10-23-2024
$10M?! That's half a year of @Waters salary
RE: TOR Cap Overage - TheOPSquid - 10-23-2024
crazy high fine wow
RE: TOR Cap Overage - HabsFanFromOntario - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 10:33 AMSeany148 Wrote: $10M?! That's half a year of @Waters salary
Less than a third, peasant money.
RE: TOR Cap Overage - hockeyfan - 10-23-2024
Cup or bust this season I guess
RE: TOR Cap Overage - RAmenAmen - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 10:42 AMTheOPSquid Wrote: crazy high fine wow
It's extremely light, since the incomplete GM tasks associated with player movement and signings also warrant the loss of all GM pay, a 2nd and 3rd round pick, and an additional $2M cap penalty, none of which have been assessed.
RE: TOR Cap Overage - sköldpaddor - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 12:31 PMRAmenAmen Wrote: It's extremely light, since the incomplete GM tasks associated with player movement and signings also warrant the loss of all GM pay, a 2nd and 3rd round pick, and an additional $2M cap penalty, none of which have been assessed.
As I explained to you directly when we talked about it, there were additional factors and precedent in play that impacted this decision. In the past, clear intent to sign contracts *has* impacted HO punishments, and in this case, all of the players were paid this season, and everyone, including head office, budget, the GMs in question, and the players in question, were under the impression that the contracts had been signed. This is the primary reason we elected to levy the (heavier) cap overage penalty instead of the "late GM tasks" punishment (which is also not clearly prescribed in the rulebook for playing players without a contract, and is something we are looking to rectify with further rulebook updates.)
RE: TOR Cap Overage - RAmenAmen - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 12:41 PMsköldpaddor Wrote: As I explained to you directly when we talked about it, there were additional factors and precedent in play that impacted this decision. In the past, clear intent to sign contracts *has* impacted HO punishments, and in this case, all of the players were paid this season, and everyone, including head office, budget, the GMs in question, and the players in question, were under the impression that the contracts had been signed. This is the primary reason we elected to levy the (heavier) cap overage penalty instead of the "late GM tasks" punishment (which is also not clearly prescribed in the rulebook for playing players without a contract, and is something we are looking to rectify with further rulebook updates.)
And that's HO's prerogative to do, but I think it's a fair argument to say that the budget clearly wasn't compliant one way or the other if they were both unsigned *and* over the cap, which was required to be done before the start of the season. If there are mitigating circumstances then HO certainly has the right to give a lighter punishment (as they did), but it *is* a lighter punishment than what the rulebook would allow.
RE: TOR Cap Overage - sköldpaddor - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 12:44 PMRAmenAmen Wrote: And that's HO's prerogative to do, but I think it's a fair argument to say that the budget clearly wasn't compliant one way or the other if they were both unsigned *and* over the cap, which was required to be done before the start of the season. If there are mitigating circumstances then HO certainly has the right to give a lighter punishment (as they did), but it *is* a lighter punishment than what the rulebook would allow.
When the rulebook is not clear on something, we do tend to look to past established precedent in order to determine what a fair ruling will be in the context of how others have been punished for similar offenses in the future.
It is worth nothing that they were *not* over the cap with the players not signed. If we say the players weren't signed in time, then the "over the cap" punishment does not kick in at all, and we could call it "late GM task" if that's what we wanted, but if the players weren't signed, they're not over cap, they just have an illegal roster (which does not have a rulebook punishment aside from us labeling it a missed GM task - and again, we're going to fix that). When it was discovered that they were not signed, TOR was instructed to sign the players immediately in order to avoid continuing to play with an illegal roster. It was after that point, when we had already said "get it done pronto" that it was determined that doing so would put them over cap this season.
I don't think there is a legal justification for levying both punishments here. If the players weren't signed in time, they're not over cap. If the players *are* considered signed, as it is clear the intent was to do (since the players were already paid by the team this season), then they are over cap, but the task wasn't missed. In light of the complexities there, and due to the severity of the issue, we elected to rule in favor of the more severe punishment, but I do not see a world where both punishments would have been issued.
RE: TOR Cap Overage - RAmenAmen - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 12:51 PMsköldpaddor Wrote: When the rulebook is not clear on something, we do tend to look to past established precedent in order to determine what a fair ruling will be in the context of how others have been punished for similar offenses in the future.
It is worth nothing that they were *not* over the cap with the players not signed. If we say the players weren't signed in time, then the "over the cap" punishment does not kick in at all, and we could call it "late GM task" if that's what we wanted, but if the players weren't signed, they're not over cap, they just have an illegal roster (which does not have a rulebook punishment aside from us labeling it a missed GM task - and again, we're going to fix that). When it was discovered that they were not signed, TOR was instructed to sign the players immediately in order to avoid continuing to play with an illegal roster. It was after that point, when we had already said "get it done pronto" that it was determined that doing so would put them over cap this season.
I don't think there is a legal justification for levying both punishments here. If the players weren't signed in time, they're not over cap. If the players *are* considered signed, as it is clear the intent was to do (since the players were already paid by the team this season), then they are over cap, but the task wasn't missed. In light of the complexities there, and due to the severity of the issue, we elected to rule in favor of the more severe punishment, but I do not see a world where both punishments would have been issued.
If that's the case then I'm not sure I understand the "clear intent to sign contracts" part of the justification. Did the team intend to be over the cap and have that in their budget, or was the entire thing incomplete?
RE: TOR Cap Overage - sköldpaddor - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 12:56 PMRAmenAmen Wrote: If that's the case then I'm not sure I understand the "clear intent to sign contracts" part of the justification. Did the team intend to be over the cap and have that in their budget, or was the entire thing incomplete?
The team budget was incorrect, largely as a result of miscommunications during the GM transition, but the budget team budget was also incorrect in a completely different way, and neither budget showed the correct contract amount for several players OR the correct cap overage amount, which we (HO) had to investigate and rectify before we could even be sure what we were looking at.
RE: TOR Cap Overage - Sburbine - 10-23-2024
Toronto should just LTIR @Fluw, cap problem solved
RE: TOR Cap Overage - FaraDian - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 01:17 PMSburbine Wrote: Toronto should just LTIR @Fluw, cap problem solvedAnd then bring him back for the start of the playoffs
RE: TOR Cap Overage - Sburbine - 10-23-2024
10-23-2024, 01:19 PMFaraDian Wrote: And then bring him back for the start of the playoffsWe are a sim league trying to mimic the NHL after all, it only makes sense.