Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: kcarrera and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Sports and Redskins  |  RSS

Backstrom Contract Details

This entry is for all of the contract nerds out there. I can call 'em that because I'm one of 'em.

I previously reported that Nicklas Backstrom's bonus-laden three year entry level contract was similar to Alex Ovechkin's and could be worth as much as $4 million. That is not correct. According to sources, it will be worth a maximum of 2.2 million this season and 2.5 million in the second and third year of the deal.

The contract breaks down like this:

His base salary is $850,000 (signing bonus of $85,000 is included).

The bonuses are broken down into two schedules -- A and B.

The A bonuses are worth $212,500 each but max out at a total of $850,000. The bonuses are 20 goals, 35 assists, 60 points, top 6 among Caps forwards in ice time, top 3 among Caps forwards in plus minus and all rookie team honors.

The B bonuses can total 500,000 this season and 800,000 in the second and third seasons. They are: top 10 in the NHL in goals, assists, points and points per game.

So there you have it. Young Backstrom is about to become a very wealthy man.

By Tarik El-Bashir  |  May 21, 2007; 1:53 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Horses Vs. Hockey
Next: DC Sports Bog: Nicklas Backstrom Likes Swedish Meatballs


So Tarik, while I was trying to read the CBA without falling asleep, it says that Schedule B bonuses can be paid by the team or the league but isn't clear how that's determined. Or do the Caps pay a bonus on top of the league's bonus?

Posted by: tallbear | May 21, 2007 2:33 PM | Report abuse

I think they are league paid. But lemme check my CBA and get back to you.

Posted by: Tarik | May 21, 2007 2:35 PM | Report abuse

The league pays some Schedule B bonuses for things like winning a trophy or being one of the top scorers. But the ones that are negotiated into the contract are paid by the team. That's what I believe anyway.

Interesting that Backstrom didn't get the maximum Schedule B bonuses (they can go up to $2 million). Do you think they traded that for an SEL clause in the unlikely event he doesn't make the Caps's roster?

Posted by: norske | May 21, 2007 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I meant to add that, in other words, the bonuses in the contract that are paid by the team are on top of any bonuses that are paid by the league. And the ones in the contract that are to be paid by the team count under the team's salary cap, while the ones potentially paid by the league do not.

Posted by: norske | May 21, 2007 3:02 PM | Report abuse

So is the cap hit the total amount he could potentially achieve in salary and bonus or just the salary? It won't make much difference this year since the Caps won't be anywhere near the max but it might be important two years down the road.

Posted by: boor4 | May 21, 2007 4:00 PM | Report abuse

The cap hit is the total potential, including salary and bonuses. As I understand it, the bonuses count under the cap as long as the player is still technically able to acheive them. For example, if there is a games played bonus, and towards the end of the season it becomes impossible for the player to play in that number of games, that bonus will no longer count under the cap. By that point, of course, it probably wouldn't matter anyway.

Hey Tarik! I'm a bigger nerd than you are!

Posted by: norske | May 21, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Norske -- you are right re: the schedule B bonuses. nice work. you are a bigger nerd. but i mean that in a good way.

Posted by: Tarik | May 21, 2007 9:00 PM | Report abuse

A cold shiver goes through me when I read that Caps Management anticipates Nicklas Backstrom participating in Rookie Camp this coming July. The first thought that entered my mind was, "Why. What's the purpose?"
I was under the impression that Rookie Camp is for "Prospects." That, Rookie Camp is for wanna be's. Well, Nicklas is certainly in neither of those catagories. Rookie Camp is for the Francois Bouchards, Oskar Osalas, and Patrick Mc Neils of the Caps' pecking order. ROOKIE CAMP IS NOT FOR WORLD CLASS PLAYERS!
I don't recall Ovey attending any Rookie Camp two years ago. Which was a smart move on Managements part. I mean, why risk injury to one of your few "Franchise Players" by exposing him to a bunch of over exuberant, hyper, "I want to make a good impression at any cost," fringe players, in the middle of July?
IMHO, to do that, would be the height of folly. Not to mention, it just plain makes no sense.

Posted by: puckguru | May 22, 2007 12:18 AM | Report abuse

I think Nicklas asked to be at the rookie camp to give himself more time to get used to the ice, the organization and all stuff around.

It is a big change in the life of a 19 yo, and he's fully aware of that.

Posted by: hdw | May 22, 2007 5:56 AM | Report abuse

Puckguru, word on the street is that Bouchard could make the team out of training camp (for nine games at least). Same for the newly signed Andrew gordon. Both are scoring line players. Shouldthe caps not see if there is any chemistry to be developed there?

Besides, having Backstrom there will be a great way to generate interest for the new Kettler complex.

Is there anything that pleases some of you people?

Posted by: Graham | May 22, 2007 10:40 AM | Report abuse

yea you are norske, especially if you think theres a chance backstrom wont make the team. matt bradley plays doesnt he?

Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2007 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Dear Graham,
You'd be wise to stop listening to that, "Street wisdom." It's, obviously, retarding your "Common sense." Which is obviously, not so common. There's only one thing Backstrom can accomplish in three measly days of Rookie Camp. And, that is to get hurt. Period!
The only thing you said in your mini - tirade that has the least bit of legitimacy, is your suggestion that Backstrom's being there, "Will be a great way to generate interest for ( In ) the new Kettler complex. Reluctantly, I'll agree with that. However, that being said, such motivations ( On Management's part ) have nothing but negative connotations, as far as I'm concerned. I'm probably speaking slightly beyond your ability to comprehend, at this point. So, I'll end it here.

Posted by: puckguru | May 23, 2007 2:21 AM | Report abuse

Puckguru, I think its cute that you'll never be satisfied. I'll just say that I'll be happy while I'm at rookie camp watching Backstrom develop chemsitry with our future scoring line players. What will you be doing, crying in your parents' basement because Backstrom could get hurt? How about getting into game shape?

Posted by: Graham | May 23, 2007 10:43 AM | Report abuse

You've missed your calling. your attempt at humor was about as successful as Ronald Reagan was at being an actor. HAHAHAHAHA. Clown.

Posted by: Puckguru | May 25, 2007 8:42 AM | Report abuse

Puckguru, whatever makes you feel good. Deep down you must know that it is a good thing that Backstrom goes to the camp.

It doesn't matter anyway, it was his call. Just about all the articles say things ilke "Backstrom told the Caps he plans to attend..."

The heart of the matter is that you take any excuse to criticise management, whether deserved or undeserved. This is a good thing so calm down.

Posted by: Graham | May 25, 2007 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Where does all of this wisdom and knowledge come from...? Its all speculation and most of it unfounded.

Personally, I can't wait for the boys to lace up their skates and start it up again. I gotta believe the Caps will be better than last year. Can't stand another year like that.

Free Agent signings, draft day, rookie camp... its all good to me! Let the fun begin. I won't waste my time speculating, but I will be watching...

Posted by: MuddaPucker | May 25, 2007 4:56 PM | Report abuse

I have but one ( Certainly don't want to overload your, obviously limited circuitry ) question for you. And, that is, "Where do you get this assinine idea that I'm not "Calm."? From your behavior, it's quite apparent which one of us is in dire need of sedation.(smile) You really are quite amusing. Poor thing.....
Now, strictly for your edification. Quite frankly, I'm not the least bit concerned whether N. Backstrom EVER COMES to D.C. What you, dear sir, must understand, is that the Caps are pretty much at the bottom of my prioritized list of daily concerns. Thanks to The Almighty Creator, I'm having a truly wonderful time while here on earth. I'm in reasonably good health. Have two kids that love their daddy. And, more than enough financing to indulge whatever interests me at any particular time. So, I've been blessed.
Be assured this is my last indulgence of your pathetic attempts to irk me. You're not even in my league. Which is abundantly obvious to all. You take care. And, "LET'S GO CAPS!!

Posted by: Puckguru | May 25, 2007 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Haha, this is good stuff. So I should listen to your whines because you have a family and make more money than me? How sad is it that higher than the caps on your priority list is coming here (taking a break from your loving kids) to try and antagonize a freakin college student. Congrats, I'm glad you have a job lol.

Remind me what any of that has to do with hockey. Thats why I'm here, not to see what my fellow anonymous posters (whom I'll never meet) do in life.

Now for my edification, since I really am just a simple minded fool of a college student, would it be considered ironic or not that a few posts above you corrected my grammar when every post of yours has at least one such error. For my further edification, which is more sad, my views on the Capitals' situation or the fact that you continue to post after saying you were done two days ago? What happened, couldn't resist? Or did you feel that I would be wowed by your life's accomplishments?

Posted by: Graham | May 25, 2007 10:15 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company