[Report] Canucks loan Sam Gagner to Toronto Marlies

[SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME]

20 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't necessarily agree with you here.  As I understand it - and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here - but Horton can't be placed on long term I.R. until the season starts - so that actually can have an impact on their ability to use that cap hit and can have a limiting effect on their offseason deals.  I believe they have to be compliant, with his cap included, before they can put him on IR and use that cap.

There are two kinds of LTIR, “in season” LTIR and “off-season” LTIR (aka “training camp LTIR”).

 

These sources probably do a better job than I would of explaining how they work (or at least the links I’m posting take up less space than my explanation would ):

 

https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2017/09/horton-lupul-fail-medicals-will-remain-on-ltir.html

 

https://www.capfriendly.com/ltir-faq#offseason (section: “Can LTIR be used in the off-season?”)

 

[oldnews]

14 minutes ago, VforVirtanen said:

Timing wise it does seem like it could have been part of the deal for Leivo. Canucks keep him on ice with the Marlies and Toronto gets first right of refusal of they need forward depth. Canucks did get a great deal on that trade so certainly possible and it would be a free/cheap asset for Toronto to call upon if they needed it. 

do you mean in a "scout's honour" kind of way - because Toronto has no such right simply by virtue of Gagner be loaned to their AHL club.

 

I think it's more likely that a team like Deadmonton or L.A. - teams fairly weak on the wing - would have interest in Gagner than Toronto.

[VforVasili]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

do you mean in a "scout's honour" kind of way - because Toronto has no such right simply by virtue of Gagner be loaned to their AHL club.

 

I think it's more likely that a team like Deadmonton or L.A. - teams fairly weak on the wing - would have interest in Gagner than Toronto.

Yes I was thinking along the lines of “future considerations”, not that there was a firm agreement. 

[Kootenay Gold]

22 minutes ago, oldnews said:

I don't necessarily agree with you here.  As I understand it - and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here - but Horton can't be placed on long term I.R. until the season starts - so that actually can have an impact on their ability to use that cap hit and can have a limiting effect on their offseason deals.  I believe they have to be compliant, with his cap included, before they can put him on IR and use that cap.

You may be right on that but I thought that a pre-existing injury had different rules applied to it regarding cap relief. I was looking at this from Cap friendly in reference to how it would apply to Nathan Horton:

Full cap relief

Players who are on a two-way contract, who did not accrue any NHL games in the previous season, can be placed on SOIR and do not count against their teams cap hit. 

[oldnews]

2 minutes ago, VforVirtanen said:

Yes I was thinking along the lines of “future considerations”, not that there was a firm agreement. 

I think there's a simpler explanation to the Leivo deal.

 

1) the Leafs had no leverage whatsoever - they were going to have to expose a player to waivers.

2) Carcone is not as worthless as a lot of people here perceive.

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Kootenay Gold said:

You may be right on that but I thought that a pre-existing injury had different rules applied to it regarding cap relief. I was looking at this from Cap friendly in reference to how it would apply to Nathan Horton:

Full cap relief

Players who are on a two-way contract, who did not accrue any NHL games in the previous season, can be placed on SOIR and do not count against their teams cap hit. 

Horton is not a 'two way' deal - not a AHL/NHL tweener - he was an NHL asset making 5.3 million.

[VforVasili]

1 minute ago, oldnews said:

I think there's a simpler explanation to the Leivo deal.

 

1) the Leafs had no leverage whatsoever - they were going to have to expose a player to waivers.

2) Carcone is not as worthless as a lot of people here perceive.

Well sure that makes more sense and all but my deep undercover conspiracy is more fun!

[kingofsurrey]

Hopefully this deal with TO .solidifies Canucks and leafs as Trading partners.....

 

So Canucks can move Edler or Tanev to TO at the deadline.....

[Kootenay Gold]

Just now, oldnews said:

Horton is not a 'two way' deal - not a AHL/NHL tweener - he was an NHL asset making 5.3 million.

AHH yes.. The devil is in the details.... I stand corrected ( overlooked that part)

 

[Kootenay Gold]

6 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Horton is not a 'two way' deal - not a AHL/NHL tweener - he was an NHL asset making 5.3 million.

I just found this explanation concerning Nathan Horton and Toronto's options which does give some good insight as to what they can do regarding Cap space:

 

Placing a player on Long Term Injured Reserve does not remove a cap hit altogether. In cases of LTIR, the cap hit is still technically on the books and the team is granted an exemption that allows them to exceed the cap by upwards of the full amount of the injured player’s cap hit (this doesn’t necessarily mean the team’s new cap limit is the cap ceiling + the full amount of the injured player’s cap hit).

The basic formula:

Cap Hit of LTIR Player – Amount of Cap Space Available = Amount Team Can Exceed the Cap.

From Broad Street Hockey (from early this season) on the basics of how the cap works:

“The simplest example of this is to think about it from a yearly cap space perspective. If you have $1 million in cap space. Once you are 50% of the way through the season, you can acquire a $2 million player. You can afford their $2 million daily cap hit because you only have to pay it for 50% of the season, and you’ve been saving up a little bit of a time for that first half of the season.”

… A team like St. Louis has a very mild amount of salary cap space; only just over a million dollars. However, $1 million dollars effectively becomes over $5 million dollars at the trade deadline. So St. Louis can go out and acquire a really good player at the trade deadline if they want…all because they have $1 million in cap space today.

 

With a player on Long Term Injured Reserve, this same rule does not apply. Because it is an exemption and not actual cap space, there is no pocketing effect for unused ‘LTIR space’. It is not the same as having the cap hit removed altogether and having that unused cap space factored into the calculation each day.

Technically, the Leafs could have, say, a 21-man active roster that’s comfortably $5-6 million under the cap, but, because of Horton’s LTIR contract, they are actually right up tight against the cap and pocketing much less.

hhh

From Fear the Fin:

Think of it this way– a $2.0MM player was injured on a team that had $1.0MM in cap room. The cap hit of the injured player ($2.0MM) minus the amount of salary cap space ($1.0MM) equals the amount that team can exceed the upper limit by ($1.0MM).

The biggest decision with an LTIR contract comes at the beginning of the season when opening day rosters have to be set and teams must become cap compliant. This is when the Leafs will have a decision to make. From the now-defunct CapGeek:

OPTION 1: Build the injured player into their opening-day roster and have that roster fit as close to the upper limit as possible without exceeding it, then place the player on LTIR.
OPTION 2: Put the injured player on LTIR on the final day of training camp and, including the injured player’s annual average salary or cap hit, build a roster that exceeds the upper limit by an amount that is as close as possible to the injured player’s annual average salary.

As we explained, the LTIR contract is not added on top of any additional cap space the team has. If the Leafs have $3 million in cap space, they don’t have $8.3 million in space once Horton goes on LTIR. They are, however, allowed to exceed the cap by up to $2.3 million in that case. That is why, at the start of next season, the team would have two options to maximize the space availed by Horton’s LTIR status: One is to be right up against the cap (as tight as possible) with Horton on the roster, before placing him LTIR on day one of the season. Or, they can place him on LTIR before the first day of the season and build a roster that’s over the cap by as close to $5.3 million as possible to maximize their space.

[oldnews]

1 minute ago, Kootenay Gold said:

  would have two options to maximize the space availed by Horton’s LTIR status: One is to be right up against the cap (as tight as possible) with Horton on the roster, before placing him LTIR on day one of the season. Or, they can place him on LTIR before the first day of the season and build a roster that’s over the cap by as close to $5.3 million as possible to maximize their space.

this is the point I was making.  It's not entirely inconsequential - it limits their off-season flexibility.

[Kootenay Gold]

Just now, oldnews said:

this is the point I was making.  It's not entirely inconsequential - it limits their off-season flexibility.

Point taken... that it does to some extent.

[coastal.view]

44 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Gagner could not and still can't make this roster.

This is not an 'asset management' decision - this team would not care if Gagner were claimed - and moreover, are probably not under the illusion that he has trade value.

 

I will be surpised - quite surprised - if he were traded to the Leafs.   The problem with that idea is that he has another year of term remaining beyond this year - when the Leafs have to re-up Matthews, Marner, Kapanen and Johnsson - not to mention trying to find some cap space to improve their blueline.

 

Leivo - who was likely the guy that was to be waived (or perhaps Gauthier or Ennis) to make room for Nylander - came in here and pushed Gagner out of a spot - in a heavily depleted Canucks lineup where Gagner was literally 18/19 on the depth chart.   Take your pick between him and Boucher, but the team recalled virtually every NHL ready body and Gagner's return to the AHL is not surprising in the least - he performed poorly.

 

Not sure why people believe the Leafs are going to want or need Gagner.  It makes for fun, unrealistic proposals, but don't hold your breath.

 

oh dear

i'm sure we will all sit up and take notice

when jt has some fresh negative back hand comment

to throw the nucks way over gagner

 

laffs might have to acquire him

simply to assuage jt's sensitivities about, and loyalty to, gagner

 

[higgyfan]

51 minutes ago, oldnews said:

Gagner could not and still can't make this roster.

This is not an 'asset management' decision - this team would not care if Gagner were claimed - and moreover, are probably not under the illusion that he has trade value.

 

I will be surpised - quite surprised - if he were traded to the Leafs.   The problem with that idea is that he has another year of term remaining beyond this year - when the Leafs have to re-up Matthews, Marner, Kapanen and Johnsson - not to mention trying to find some cap space to improve their blueline.

 

Leivo - who was likely the guy that was to be waived (or perhaps Gauthier or Ennis) to make room for Nylander - came in here and pushed Gagner out of a spot - in a heavily depleted Canucks lineup where Gagner was literally 18/19 on the depth chart.   Take your pick between him and Boucher, but the team recalled virtually every NHL ready body and Gagner's return to the AHL is not surprising in the least - he performed poorly.

 

Not sure why people believe the Leafs are going to want or need Gagner.  It makes for fun, unrealistic proposals, but don't hold your breath.

 

Just another UFA failure on Benning's part.  Eriksson is far worse, but the Gagner's signing is a baddy.  What's that?  9.5m for 5 goals so far this year?  Wonder how the owner is liking it...

[cyoung]

Just now, The 5th Line said:

Keep Gagner up and sending Gaudette down to help the center situation in Utica, not to mention he could use the seasoning.  Wouldn't hurt

Ya because utica's center depth is our primary concern. Come on man.

[ktcy2]

Very disappointed in canucks management this past few days. I don’t think on ice play matters. 

 

Schaller? Gaudette? 

 

I just can’t believe it, Gagner’s powerplay presence? Exactly what had Schaller or Gaudette done to derserve spots over Gagner or Leipsic ? 

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

3 hours ago, Drakrami said:

you do realize who gets sent down and called up is not the coach's decision but Benning's, right?

You do realize a coach has a lot of influence in helping a GM make those decisions as well especially with prospects, as the coach is the one who's dealing with that player daily and coaching him to play his system, yes the GM has the final say, but a good GM also trusts his coach in who he thinks would or is working best in his system.

[Davathor]

Lots of love Sam

 

LOL

[Stelar]

Well well well, according to Greens post game comments he had quite a bit of say in this decision.  A decision “we” made.  Go figure eh.....

[spook007]

So pleased to see Gagner being the on sent down. 

We are rebuilding. He is definitely not part of the future. 

Benning has stood by his word. Gaudette is still there.  Goldy in the pressbox last game, but stil there. Motte still there etc etc. Those are the players we need to worry about. The future. We are rebuilding this team. We need to make room for anyone, who shows potential to play in the NHL. 

Thank you JB. Keep going. Don’t deviate from the course.