Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * * 5 votes

Tentative Agreement Reached.


  • Please log in to reply
401 replies to this topic

#331 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:33 AM

Posted this in the Luongo thread, belongs here i guess.

So they did get the cap recapture rule in. I quickly read the above on twitter but didn't have time to read thoroughly. This is good, I like this rule better than no rule against back diving contract as in previous CBA or the signing club being responsible for entire cap hit like originally proposed by NHL.

One thing I'd like clarification on is, if the Canucks trade Luongo to Florida and take part of his salary do they have to take that amount in his cap hit as well ??

Edit, this is what I found. This was the original proposal

In the context of Player Trades, participating Clubs will be permitted to allocate Cap charges and related salary payment obligations between them, subject to specified parameters. Specifically, Clubs may agree to retain, for each of the remaining years of the Player's SPC, no more than the lesser of: (i) $3 million of a particular SPC's Cap charge or (ii) 50 percent of the SPC's AAV ("Retained Salary Transaction"). In any Retained Salary Transaction, salary obligations as between Clubs would be allocated on the same percentage basis as Cap charges are being allocated. So, for instance, if an assigning Club agrees to retain 30% of an SPC's Cap charge over the balance of its term, it will also retain an obligation to reimburse the acquiring Club 30% of the Player's contractual compensation in each of the remaining years of the contract. A Club may not have more than two (2) contracts as to which Cap charges have been allocated between Clubs in a Player Trade, and no more than $5 million in allocated Cap charges in the aggregate in any one season.


Edited by WHL rocks, 08 January 2013 - 12:34 AM.

  • 0

#332 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,738 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:12 AM

They had to have changed that, otherwise the rule doesn't really help do what it's supposed to; which is to allow one team to reatain cap, while the other team absorbs salary.

You have to be able to have that seperation of cap and salary, or it really isn't a very effective rule.

Why would a low spending team trade a player and keep half their salary and half their cap hit? They wouldn't wanna be spedning millions on a player they've traded, but they do want their cap hit. They'd be better off keeping the player, or dumping all of their salary and overpaying a free agent.

And why would a high spending team trade a player and keep half of their cap hit? That doesn't make sense. It might make sense if they're trading for a player, and they can absorb only half of their cap hit. But like I said, it doesn't make much sense for a low spending team to pay half a players salary to play on another team.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#333 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 69,116 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 09:00 AM

Is Ilya Kovalchuk staying in the KHL?:

A lot of big-name Russian-born players went to the KHL over the lockout and a couple, like Ilya Kovalchuk, suggested months ago that it might not be a temporary assignment.


“Basically, I don’t rule out staying in Russia in the case of a reduction of our salaries in the NHL,” Kovalchuk told Sportbox.ru.


With the NHL season is about to get underway, Kovalchuk is still with St. Petersburg SKA and playing with them today, according to the Bergen Record’s Tom Gulitti. So is he just getting in a little extra time with the team he has been captaining or is something else going on?


TSN Bob McKenzie’s tweeted that many in New Jersey are hearing that Kovalchuk might not return, although McKenzie cautioned that it’s just a rumor and not something he’s confirmed.


For his part, Devils GM Lou Lamoriello hasn’t spoken with Kovalchuk yet, according to the Bergen Record. However, Lamoriello hasn’t gotten any indication that Kovalchuk is thinking about staying in Russia in defiance of the 15-year, $100 million deal he signed with New Jersey.


Kovalchuk’s agent Jay Grossman added that he’s “working on” arrangements for the superstar to head back to New Jersey.


So now we wait to see if that happens or if the rumors have a basis in reality.


http://prohockeytalk...ing-in-the-khl/
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#334 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 69,116 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:16 PM

@reporterchris: NHL training camps expected to open Sunday, according to Bill Daly.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#335 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:33 PM

They had to have changed that, otherwise the rule doesn't really help do what it's supposed to; which is to allow one team to reatain cap, while the other team absorbs salary.

You have to be able to have that seperation of cap and salary, or it really isn't a very effective rule.

Why would a low spending team trade a player and keep half their salary and half their cap hit? They wouldn't wanna be spedning millions on a player they've traded, but they do want their cap hit. They'd be better off keeping the player, or dumping all of their salary and overpaying a free agent.

And why would a high spending team trade a player and keep half of their cap hit? That doesn't make sense. It might make sense if they're trading for a player, and they can absorb only half of their cap hit. But like I said, it doesn't make much sense for a low spending team to pay half a players salary to play on another team.


Yeah that\s what I'm thinking. But here's the thing. Can Canucks technically be over the $70 mill cap in such scenario?

Example, Canucks trade Lu to Tampa straight up for Lecavalier. Can Tampa keep part of Lecavalier's cap hit but Canucks take the entire salary? If so I think there are a lot more teams interested in Luongo than just Toronto.

Edit. But from what I've read if a team trades a player and keep part of cap hit they also must keep part of salary.

Edited by WHL rocks, 08 January 2013 - 01:07 PM.

  • 0

#336 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:39 PM

Is Ilya Kovalchuk staying in the KHL?:

A lot of big-name Russian-born players went to the KHL over the lockout and a couple, like Ilya Kovalchuk, suggested months ago that it might not be a temporary assignment.


“Basically, I don’t rule out staying in Russia in the case of a reduction of our salaries in the NHL,” Kovalchuk told Sportbox.ru.


With the NHL season is about to get underway, Kovalchuk is still with St. Petersburg SKA and playing with them today, according to the Bergen Record’s Tom Gulitti. So is he just getting in a little extra time with the team he has been captaining or is something else going on?


TSN Bob McKenzie’s tweeted that many in New Jersey are hearing that Kovalchuk might not return, although McKenzie cautioned that it’s just a rumor and not something he’s confirmed.


For his part, Devils GM Lou Lamoriello hasn’t spoken with Kovalchuk yet, according to the Bergen Record. However, Lamoriello hasn’t gotten any indication that Kovalchuk is thinking about staying in Russia in defiance of the 15-year, $100 million deal he signed with New Jersey.


Kovalchuk’s agent Jay Grossman added that he’s “working on” arrangements for the superstar to head back to New Jersey.


So now we wait to see if that happens or if the rumors have a basis in reality.


http://prohockeytalk...ing-in-the-khl/



Nah, this is just a bunch of over analyzing by Bobby Mac and other North American so called "analysts". Kovalchuk will be back with the NHL. He's the captain of his KHL squad, he's not gonna jump on the first flight back to Jersey as soon as he hears a tentative deal has been reached.

Kovy will continue to play until a deal is ratified and then come back. North American culture is different from other cultures. Kovy is Russian, it's hard for Booby Mac to understand Kovy's thought pattern. He'll be back next week. No worries here.
  • 0

#337 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,328 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:39 PM

@reporterchris: NHL training camps expected to open Sunday, according to Bill Daly.

Camps open on Sunday, first game on Saturday. This is going to be the most hectic week in NHL history.
  • 0

Subbancopy.jpg


#338 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 12:45 PM

Camps open on Sunday, first game on Saturday. This is going to be the most hectic week in NHL history.


Yeah just read that too. ^^^ Sunday?? Why so long?? They should open by Friday.
  • 0

#339 Kyosama

Kyosama

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Joined: 26-June 09

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:04 PM

Yeah just read that too. ^^^ Sunday?? Why so long?? They should open by Friday.


They technically can't open training camps until the CBA is finalized, and that's not expected to happen until Saturday.
  • 0

#340 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:08 PM

They technically can't open training camps until the CBA is finalized, and that's not expected to happen until Saturday.


Yeah I realize that but I thought the BOG was meeting on Wednesday and players were voting online electronically over a 2 day period. They should have all that done by Friday.

Edited by WHL rocks, 08 January 2013 - 01:11 PM.

  • 0

#341 BabychStache

BabychStache

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,148 posts
  • Joined: 13-October 05

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:16 PM

This ratification process is ridiculous.

The GM's are all going to age 10 years in one week getting rosters together. They really need to open it up for them today or tomorrow to allow for some time, flights, family moves etc etc.

Not to mention get some excitement into the press.
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to Goaltenderinterference for the awesome Sig!

#342 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,516 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:28 PM

They technically can't open training camps until the CBA is finalized, and that's not expected to happen until Saturday.

It may happen sooner, but that's the window the PA has said it wants to make sure all the players can review the proposal and get their votes in.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#343 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:37 PM

Anyone looking for a good chuckle should check out Down Goes Brown's list of surprises found in the new CBA deal:

A few of my favorites:
  • "An improved pension plan will make more funds available to the players who retire early due to all those critical safety issues that didn't end up being addressed in the deal at all."
  • "The two sides will split the cost of a tasteful memorial plaque and reflecting pool to be located at the top of the contract length hill that Bill Daly died on."
  • "The last page includes a preliminary agreement about which mind-numbingly trivial issues the two sides will argue incessantly about when we do this all again in eight years."
(Note to self: Get that book already!)

Edited by poetica, 08 January 2013 - 01:38 PM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#344 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 01:46 PM

For anyone interested....

Re: Salary retention in trades

Numerous sources now indicating (teams have been informed of the CBA details, so leaks are becoming more frequent) that teams will be able to retain up to 50% of a contract's salary in a trade and can do so for up to a maximum of three contracts per team. The total amount of cap retained through trades cannot exceed 15% of the salary cap ceiling.

Source: http://www.coppernbl...nd-were-baaaack
(This page has the most detailed look at the new CBA I've found.)
  • 1
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#345 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 02:14 PM

CBA rule re retaining cap and salary in trade very well explained here.

Read the following if interested in this sort of thing.

We should have a thread for just the rules and details of new CBA. I wanted to start such thread over the past couple of days but didn't because there are so many CBA threads popping up over the past couple of days.

Here’s an interesting new rule NHL general managers should be able to have a lot of fun with.
Or at the very least get out of some of their most egregious mistakes.
Teams will in the new collective agreement be able to for the first time under a salary cap keep salary on their books and trade part of a contract.
There are four golden rules that apply to retaining salary:
1. Teams can only have three contracts on the books where they’ve retained salary in a trade
2. Teams can keep only up to 15 per cent of the salary cap in a given year, meaning they would max out at $9.645-million under the $64.3-million cap that’s likely to be in place in 2013-14 and 2014-15
3. Only 50 per cent of a contract can be kept
4. A contract can only be traded in one of these deals twice
This is going to be a fairly complicated provision in the deal, and one that will make following the salary cap machinations of teams even more difficult.
Let’s use some examples here to make the rule easier to understand, with the cap-strapped Montreal Canadiens and (likely) unwanted defenceman Tomas Kaberle as the guinea pigs.
Kaberle has two seasons left on his deal, both for $4.25-million in both salary and cap hit. The Habs can then choose to keep $2.125-million of that, continue to pay half his contract, but gain the rest in cap space by sending him to another team.
Let’s say the New York Islanders take on that deal. They will be on the hook for two more years of both cap hit and salary.
If the Isles then choose to move him, they can then keep up to $1.06-million of Kaberle’s contract and another team will get him for that paltry amount.
This gets a little more complicated with a more complicated contract. Let’s say Roberto Luongo is in fact traded from Vancouver to Toronto, and one of the things the Canucks decide to do is keep $1-million of the cap hit (or 18.8 per cent).
That would then mean they’re on the hook for that amount of the remaining salary (just under $9-million) and would be stuck with a $1-million cap hit for a long, long time.
(Which is why it’s unlikely they agree to do so.)
Because only 50 per cent of the deal can be kept, however, the rule functions much like re-entry waivers did previously, and we saw how few teams were willing to eat that high of a cap hit over time.
The New York Rangers, for example, wouldn’t put Wade Redden on re-entry waivers because they didn’t want more than $3-million in dead space, and it stands to reason teams won’t be clamouring to push up against the 15 per cent limit.
On the other hand, if you’re a GM out there and you see some value in an unwanted player at a lower cap hit, perhaps you offer to take a Rene Bourque or someone of that ilk at 70 or 80 per cent of his remaining salary.
This could be a fascinating new wrinkle in that way, as we’ve often seen players become untradeable due to their contracts and GMs like Brian Burke have pushed to allow more creativity in deals.
Whether it dramatically ups the number of trades being made remains to be seen, but that’s the hope from NHL executives right now.


Edited by WHL rocks, 08 January 2013 - 02:15 PM.

  • 0

#346 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,516 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 08 January 2013 - 02:45 PM

For anyone interested....

Re: Salary retention in trades


Source: http://www.coppernbl...nd-were-baaaack
(This page has the most detailed look at the new CBA I've found.)

CBA rule re retaining cap and salary in trade very well explained here.

Read the following if interested in this sort of thing.

We should have a thread for just the rules and details of new CBA. I wanted to start such thread over the past couple of days but didn't because there are so many CBA threads popping up over the past couple of days.

Reading both those explanations, they might indicate different things. My understanding is closest to poetica's post, while WHL's post doesn't indicate as clearly about when salary versus cap can be retained.

Edited by elvis15, 08 January 2013 - 02:45 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#347 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 02:59 PM

Reading both those explanations, they might indicate different things. My understanding is closest to poetica's post, while WHL's post doesn't indicate as clearly about when salary versus cap can be retained.


Really? I've been very interested in this rule and have read pretty much every post on HF Boards to get more details on it. As well as searched Google multiple times. The 4 point explanation I posted above is the best I could find.

What does the following tell you about "when salary vs cap can be retained?

12 - Retention of Salary in Trades - Details are still pretty sketchy here, but this is a big one. Teams will be able to retain up to $5 Million total in salary during trades and apply that to their cap rather than seeing the full amount transferred to a player's new team.UPDATE: Previous information here appears to have been inaccurate. Numerous sources now indicating (teams have been informed of the CBA details, so leaks are becoming more frequent) that teams will be able to retain up to 50% of a contract's salary in a trade and can do so for up to a maximum of three contracts per team. The total amount of cap retained through trades cannot exceed 15% of the salary cap ceiling.


  • 0

#348 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:00 PM

Hopefully we'll find out more details soon. I'll be particularly interested to know if teams who keep part of the cap hit are required to keep paying that portion of the salary, or if richer teams will be able to pick up a good player with a decent salary but lowered cap hit while poor teams are able to retain the cap hit from a player they don't actually pay. That, of course, would be an obvious cap circumvention that one would hope they would have anticipated and sought to avoid, but given the fact that they were "surprised" by the cap circumventing contracts under the last CBA even though the NBA had already been experiencing the exact same problem doesn't fill me with confidence.

Either way, I feel for the people at Cap Geek!

Edited by poetica, 08 January 2013 - 03:02 PM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#349 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:06 PM

Really? I've been very interested in this rule and have read pretty much every post on HF Boards to get more details on it. As well as searched Google multiple times. The 4 point explanation I posted above is the best I could find.

What does the following tell you about "when salary vs cap can be retained?


I don't think Elvis meant his comments to be taken personally but was simply talking about the fact that it's hard to get any concrete details right now.

Regardless, can you share the source for your quote please? I'd be interested in reading the rest of the article.

Edited by poetica, 08 January 2013 - 03:07 PM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#350 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 69,116 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:14 PM

@annschmaltz: Schneider not worried if Luongo is at training camp. "There's worse things than having a world class goalie pushing you to be your best."
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#351 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:15 PM

I don't think Elvis meant his comments to be taken personally but was simply talking about the fact that it's hard to get any concrete details right now.

Regardless, can you share the source for your quote please? I'd be interested in reading the rest of the article.


I don't think I took it personal.

I asked elvis the question because I want to know what I'm missing. I've been searching for more info on CBA details relentlessly over the past couple of days. I even suggested dedicating a thread to CBA details. I am very interested in understanding this particular rule, this is the reason for my question. Not OMG elvis likes someone else's link better than mine.

Edit: Here's the link http://www.theglobea...article7033878/

Edited by WHL rocks, 08 January 2013 - 03:20 PM.

  • 0

#352 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,516 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:25 PM

Really? I've been very interested in this rule and have read pretty much every post on HF Boards to get more details on it. As well as searched Google multiple times. The 4 point explanation I posted above is the best I could find.

What does the following tell you about "when salary vs cap can be retained?

Not to say that the intent of both articles wasn't the same, just that the wording from one was clearer for me (I was specifically comparing points 2 and 3 from yours to her post). The part that is unclear in one but not in the other is when cap is retained versus when salary is as they try and specifically use those words to be completely obvious.

Saying "only 50% of a contract can be kept" isn't as clear for me where saying "salary" is easy to determine as what a player actually makes in a given year.

Hopefully we'll find out more details soon. I'll be particularly interested to know if teams who keep part of the cap hit are required to keep paying that portion of the salary, or if richer teams will be able to pick up a good player with a decent salary but lowered cap hit while poor teams are able to retain the cap hit from a player they don't actually pay. That, of course, would be an obvious cap circumvention that one would hope they would have anticipated and sought to avoid, but given the fact that they were "surprised" by the cap circumventing contracts under the last CBA even though the NBA had already been experiencing the exact same problem doesn't fill me with confidence.

Either way, I feel for the people at Cap Geek!

Well, I wouldn't call it a cap circumvention if it's in the CBA as allowed that way. They had to foresee that as one of the scenarios, or else I'd question the ability of the people involved in the negotiations, but then you mention that as well. If that's the case though, then I'd say why did we spend so long negotiating a CBA when we could have put a basic framework in place and then allowed the NHL to decline/accept deals that go against what is good for the league.

I do have a feeling this one will take some time to figure out, however, and we'll be getting it wrong any number of times.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#353 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,516 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:26 PM

I don't think I took it personal.

I asked elvis the question because I want to know what I'm missing. I've been searching for more info on CBA details relentlessly over the past couple of days. I even suggested dedicating a thread to CBA details. I am very interested in understanding this particular rule, this is the reason for my question. Not OMG elvis likes someone else's link better than mine.

Edit: Here's the link http://www.theglobea...article7033878/

You'd be surprised what some people think... B)

But to explain further, I think there're more detail in the article you posted, but better semantics in poetica's post.

Edited by elvis15, 08 January 2013 - 03:27 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#354 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:30 PM

^^ What do you guys think about a sign and trade deal like they do in NBA. That could circumvent the CBA in a way.
  • 0

#355 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:37 PM

Edit: Here's the link http://www.theglobea...article7033878/


Thank you.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#356 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:41 PM

Not to say that the intent of both articles wasn't the same, just that the wording from one was clearer for me (I was specifically comparing points 2 and 3 from yours to her post). The part that is unclear in one but not in the other is when cap is retained versus when salary is as they try and specifically use those words to be completely obvious.

Saying "only 50% of a contract can be kept" isn't as clear for me where saying "salary" is easy to determine as what a player actually makes in a given year.


Following point 4 point 3 is explained in detail with examples.

The 50% of contract can be kept part is the only factual part of her link. As the author of Poetica's link says the $5 million part originally written was inaccurate.

The highlighted part is the only one you should refer to in Poetica's link as the non highlighted part which you find easier to understand is incorrect according to the writer.

12 - Retention of Salary in Trades - Details are still pretty sketchy here, but this is a big one. Teams will be able to retain up to $5 Million total in salary during trades and apply that to their cap rather than seeing the full amount transferred to a player's new team.UPDATE:Previous information here appears to have been inaccurate. Numerous sources now indicating (teams have been informed of the CBA details, so leaks are becoming more frequent) that teams will be able to retain up to 50% of a contract's salary in a trade and can do so for up to a maximum of three contracts per team. The total amount of cap retained through trades cannot exceed 15% of the salary cap ceiling.


Edited by WHL rocks, 08 January 2013 - 03:53 PM.

  • 0

#357 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:51 PM

^^ What do you guys think about a sign and trade deal like they do in NBA. That could circumvent the CBA in a way.


Without knowing any specifics of NBA deals, "sign and trade" certainly sounds like what I was wondering about as one possible way teams would be able to circumvent the cap IF teams retain cap hit but not salary. I think that's the big question right now because that changes everything. If teams retain part of the cap hit only, it would seem to have no purpose other than cap circumvention. If, however, teams retain part of the salary that they must pay and take the partial cap hit for, it would seem to only be useful for teams looking to move a player with a big contract to poor teams. Basically, it would be a type of voluntary welfare.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#358 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:54 PM

The highlighted part is the only one you should refer to in Poetica's link as the non highlighted part which you find easier to understand is incorrect according to the writer.


In fairness, that was the only part I actually quoted in my post. :)
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#359 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:55 PM

Thank you.


No worries. I'm just glad there are others on CDC interested in this type of stuff and not just me. lol
  • 0

#360 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 08 January 2013 - 03:59 PM

Without knowing any specifics of NBA deals, "sign and trade" certainly sounds like what I was wondering about as one possible way teams would be able to circumvent the cap IF teams retain cap hit but not salary. I think that's the big question right now because that changes everything. If teams retain part of the cap hit only, it would seem to have no purpose other than cap circumvention. If, however, teams retain part of the salary that they must pay and take the partial cap hit for, it would seem to only be useful for teams looking to move a player with a big contract to poor teams. Basically, it would be a type of voluntary welfare.


As far as I've been able to gather cap space and salary are tied. A team can NOT keep cap space only, or vise versa a team can NOT retain salary only.

What I'm thinking as circumvention loophole GM's might look at is since you are allowed to sign your player for 8 years vs 7 for other teams UFA a player, his current team and prospective team may all agree to sign a player to 8 years and trade him to where he wants to go.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.