VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 Okay, this is not another "Hey, let's get rid of Daniel and Henrik" proposal, in fact its not a specific proposal at all. I think, like most fans, I'd really like to see the Sedins finish their careers here, but I'm also wondering if they would like a shot at the cup. They still have one more year left on their contracts, but they are clearly slowing down and this might be the last year that they can compete and be an effective part of a cup run. Just trying to see if people on this board think that a type of "Guaranteed Return" trade would work. I don't think a lot of teams would want to put 12 million on their books for next year. Assuming we continue to trend out of the playoffs, would the league accept this as a valid trade? To (Insert name of cup contending team here) Daniel Sedin Henrik Sedin 75% salary retained (2016/17 season only) To Vancouver 1st round pick 2017 2nd round pick 2018 Prospect Salary dump player (make the numbers match) Daniel and Henrik go and chase getting their names on the cup. At the draft, we finalize the second half of the trade, guaranteed return to Vancouver; To Vancouver: Daniel Sedin Henrik Sedin To (Insert name of cup (hopefully winning) team here) 2017 5th round pick Daniel and Henrik go on to finish their careers in Vancouver after having the chance to chase the cup one more time. Again, this is just speculating on whether the league would try and block something like this, or if they would just let it ride. Thoughts? Feedback?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 I don't think that would be valid. I'm 95% sure that 50% is the max you can retain and it can't be for specific years it has to be for the entirety of the contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 3 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: Assuming we continue to trend out of the playoffs, would the league accept this as a valid trade? No. Not only can you not retain that much of a contract, the rest of the deal violates league rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AriGold Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 Florida... They have the relationship, the capspace , the prospect and picks to make the deal. Jokinen - Huberdeau - Barkov Sedin - Sedin - Jagr Marchessault - Trocheck - Smith Bjugstad - Malgin - Sceviour 2 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: I don't think that would be valid. I'm 95% sure that 50% is the max you can retain and it can't be for specific years it has to be for the entirety of the contract. You are correct, 50% is the max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said: I don't think that would be valid. I'm 95% sure that 50% is the max you can retain and it can't be for specific years it has to be for the entirety of the contract. I haven't researched in the CBA at all on that, so just total speculation on this. I don't want to see them moved unless they want to go after their name on the cup, but even if it was 50%, do a deal at the deadline to minimize exposure to the other team and then repatriate them at the draft, I don't think there is anything there that the league would have an issue with? I could be wrong though, they get bent out of shape about this stuff sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 6 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: I haven't researched in the CBA at all on that, so just total speculation on this. I don't want to see them moved unless they want to go after their name on the cup, but even if it was 50%, do a deal at the deadline to minimize exposure to the other team and then repatriate them at the draft, I don't think there is anything there that the league would have an issue with? I could be wrong though, they get bent out of shape about this stuff sometimes. It would have to be a behind the table type offer, Canucks trade for picks and then make an under the table handshake that canucks would trade for them to get them back. It would have to be a completely new trade coming back to vancouver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 7 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: It would have to be a behind the table type offer, Canucks trade for picks and then make an under the table handshake that canucks would trade for them to get them back. It would have to be a completely new trade coming back to vancouver that would reek and the league would not allow the return trade to be approved loaning players is not an option between nhl clubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 You can only have retained salaries for 3 players at any one time. The Canucks already have retained salary for Luongo and Higgins. How are we going to trade the Sedins and retain salary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 7 minutes ago, Rick Blight said: You can only have retained salaries for 3 players at any one time. The Canucks already have retained salary for Luongo and Higgins. How are we going to trade the Sedins and retain salary? Actually, on second thought I think Higgins was bought out. But I am going from memory and I am very old......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 52 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: It would have to be a behind the table type offer, Canucks trade for picks and then make an under the table handshake that canucks would trade for them to get them back. It would have to be a completely new trade coming back to vancouver I agree, I don't think it could be anything official, but if the trade was to a team that would have trouble fitting the Sedins under their salary cap next season, even at 50%, then its really likely that they would do the deal anyway. The Sedins control a NMC, so its not like the team that they were moved to could just dump them anywhere. We see lots of deals though that are for unspecified, future consideration thrown in. In this case, its a handshake deal where the Sedins return to Canucks for a pick or two. I don't know, this was just completely hypothetical, the GM's do stuff that circumvents that cap and CBA all the time, trying to figure out if this would slide through and be filed under, "Loopholes to plug during next lockout" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 49 minutes ago, coastal.view said: that would reek and the league would not allow the return trade to be approved loaning players is not an option between nhl clubs Its borderline, but is there anything in the CBA that specifically says that players can't be traded back to the originating team within X period of time? I've done a rudimentary scan of some of the rules around trades in past, but haven't looked that closely. Players get moved for really weird returns these days in cap balancing. The league would look at it really skeptically, but unless there is a specific, written agreement, could they really deny a trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 1 hour ago, coastal.view said: that would reek and the league would not allow the return trade to be approved loaning players is not an option between nhl clubs For sure it would be investigated in and if the league found out about it both teams would be fined. But it does happen, last expansion draft there was a bunch of under the table agreements although the NHL is said to be trying to crack down on that this time. 14 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: Its borderline, but is there anything in the CBA that specifically says that players can't be traded back to the originating team within X period of time? I've done a rudimentary scan of some of the rules around trades in past, but haven't looked that closely. Players get moved for really weird returns these days in cap balancing. The league would look at it really skeptically, but unless there is a specific, written agreement, could they really deny a trade? The league does have the power to veto a moves, if they felt something was done in place to bypass a rule they would block the deal and fine the teams involved. Kind of like they did with the kovy contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 Personally I don't think the Sedins would want to come back if we moved them. No with where the team is at in rebuilding. Two scenarios would play out. Sedins win the cup and then they'd likely retire. There wouldn't be much incentive to come back to a struggling rebuilding team. Sedins make a playoff run, don't win the cup and stick with that team the following year to keep their cup winning chances high. Bourque esq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where'd Luongo? Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 1 hour ago, VegasCanuck said: Okay, this is not another "Hey, let's get rid of Daniel and Henrik" proposal, in fact its not a specific proposal at all. I think, like most fans, I'd really like to see the Sedins finish their careers here, but I'm also wondering if they would like a shot at the cup. They still have one more year left on their contracts, but they are clearly slowing down and this might be the last year that they can compete and be an effective part of a cup run. Just trying to see if people on this board think that a type of "Guaranteed Return" trade would work. I don't think a lot of teams would want to put 12 million on their books for next year. Assuming we continue to trend out of the playoffs, would the league accept this as a valid trade? To (Insert name of cup contending team here) Daniel Sedin Henrik Sedin 75% salary retained (2016/17 season only) To Vancouver 1st round pick 2017 2nd round pick 2018 Prospect Salary dump player (make the numbers match) Daniel and Henrik go and chase getting their names on the cup. At the draft, we finalize the second half of the trade, guaranteed return to Vancouver; To Vancouver: Daniel Sedin Henrik Sedin To (Insert name of cup (hopefully winning) team here) 2017 5th round pick Daniel and Henrik go on to finish their careers in Vancouver after having the chance to chase the cup one more time. Again, this is just speculating on whether the league would try and block something like this, or if they would just let it ride. Thoughts? Feedback?? What happens when we make that trade and then the Canucks win the cup without the Sedins? Everyone knows we are one prospect away from being champs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 4 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: For sure it would be investigated in and if the league found out about it both teams would be fined. But it does happen, last expansion draft there was a bunch of under the table agreements although the NHL is said to be trying to crack down on that this time. The league does have the power to veto a moves, if they felt something was done in place to bypass a rule they would block the deal and fine the teams involved. Kind of like they did with the kovy contract. Teams trade guys with expiring contracts all the time with intention of resigning them during the off season. This is more grey area than that, but its moving the same direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 2 minutes ago, VegasCanuck said: Teams trade guys with expiring contracts all the time with intention of resigning them during the off season. This is more grey area than that, but its moving the same direction. Yeah but it would involve the both teams knowing the intention with contract term still on the books. It's shady and as i said in my post above. Why would the sedins want to come back to vancouver? chances our they don't win the cup, and if they do why go out playing your final year with a rebuilding team? If we move them, it's because the sedins and the canucks are on different paths and it would be the last we see of them in a canucks uniform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 1 minute ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Yeah but it would involve the both teams knowing the intention with contract term still on the books. It's shady and as i said in my post above. Why would the sedins want to come back to vancouver? chances our they don't win the cup, and if they do why go out playing your final year with a rebuilding team? If we move them, it's because the sedins and the canucks are on different paths and it would be the last we see of them in a canucks uniform. They have stated that they want to stay here, but its a valid point. Problem is, I don't think a lot of teams that are challenging for the cup could afford to put them on the books for a full year, even with 50% retained. Trade at the deadline, a team is only absorbing a portion of the 6 million that 50% would represent. That's a number that with some creative moves, would fit in under the cap. I really don't think they want to leave Vancouver, I can see them becoming some part of the team front office when they retire if they don't want to go back to Sweden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 Just now, VegasCanuck said: They have stated that they want to stay here, but its a valid point. Problem is, I don't think a lot of teams that are challenging for the cup could afford to put them on the books for a full year, even with 50% retained. Trade at the deadline, a team is only absorbing a portion of the 6 million that 50% would represent. That's a number that with some creative moves, would fit in under the cap. I really don't think they want to leave Vancouver, I can see them becoming some part of the team front office when they retire if they don't want to go back to Sweden. If we move them, It just involves us taking back a big contract. And it doesn't necessarily have to be a bad contract. 50% retained means it's only like adding one $7 million player. That just means a team really only has to move one contract to find the room. Callahan Plekanec Nash/Girardi Sharp Fowler McDonald/Streit Iginla Ribeiro Marleau Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownky Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 We also did this in the past with Geoff Sanderson w/ Columbus. Canucks acquired him (Sanderson) at the trade deadline and then waived him back so Columbus could pick him up in the off season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasCanuck Posted November 24, 2016 Author Share Posted November 24, 2016 21 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: If we move them, It just involves us taking back a big contract. And it doesn't necessarily have to be a bad contract. 50% retained means it's only like adding one $7 million player. That just means a team really only has to move one contract to find the room. Callahan Plekanec Nash/Girardi Sharp Fowler McDonald/Streit Iginla Ribeiro Marleau However, I really don't think that the management wants them to finish their careers anywhere but in Vancouver. This would just be about "loaning them out" for a chance to get their names on the cup. I think you'd have trouble getting most of those guys to waive their NTC/NMC's to come this way as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.