[Trade] Golden Knights trade Evgenii Dadonov, conditional 2023 2nd-round pick to Ducks for Ryan Kesler, John Moore (VOIDED)

[HKSR]

13 minutes ago, mll said:

Yes, but by putting a cap in the post-season you are also penalising teams that never used LTIR and banked cap space to add at the deadline.  It will mostly prevent teams from making trades at the deadline.  

 

Say Vancouver are contenders and then a key player has a season ending injury, you really don't want to give them the option to put him on LTIR so they can add someone at the deadline?  

 

It's also a multi billion business - other teams aren't just going to let another team abuse LTIR.  Kucherov had a torn labrum in his hip - it's a 5-6 month recovery time.  Plenty of NHLers underwent that same surgery - it's not a fabricated timeline.  Just that season Pastrnak and Seguin went through the same surgery.

 

Vegas are at serious risk of missing the playoffs.  Teams can't just easily do without their best players.  

Then why not simply change the formula so players on LTIR don't affect the cap in the sense that the teams with players on LTIR can still bank cap space. 

The thing is, the playoffs needs some kind of a cap.  As others have said, being able to dress a $100M lineup when the upper limit is supposed to be $81.5M is ridiculous.

[mll]

Just now, HKSR said:

Then why not simply change the formula so players on LTIR don't affect the cap in the sense that the teams with players on LTIR can still bank cap space. 

The thing is, the playoffs needs some kind of a cap.  As others have said, being able to dress a $100M lineup when the upper limit is supposed to be $81.5M is ridiculous.

Wouldn't make sense - why complain about LTIR if you want to remove all the reasons why teams want to try and avoid LTIR.  LTIR prevents teams from banking cap space - every day they use less than they are allowed, they forfeit that cap space.  It's the penalty for using LTIR.  As they can't bank cap space, they have bonus overages.  The bonus cushion is also removed so it limits who they can recall. 

 

Teams who have avoided LTIR are banking cap space.  It allows them to exceed the cap for the rest of the season.  I explained it higher up.  Why penalise those teams.  You really want to cancel the TDL and prevent teams from trading their expiring UFAs?  Can't imagine non playoffs teams being too happy about that.

 

Brisesbois traded Callahan's 5.8M LTIR contract and took back Mike Condon's 2.4M contract - he buried him in the minors for a residual cap hit of over 1.3M.  Condon was never recalled to the NHL.  By avoiding LTIR it allowed Tampa to bank cap space to add at the deadline although they had over 1.3M in dead cap.

 

 

[BPA]

I’m confused.  Why would a cap during the playoffs be a bad thing?  

Teams can still make trades utilizing the LTIR.  The point of those trades (or should be) is to make the playoffs.  Once in the playoffs, they have choice of players so long as the team on the ice fits under the cap.

[HKSR]

16 minutes ago, mll said:

Wouldn't make sense - why complain about LTIR if you want to remove all the reasons why teams want to try and avoid LTIR.  LTIR prevents teams from banking cap space - every day they use less than they are allowed, they forfeit that cap space.  It's the penalty for using LTIR.  As they can't bank cap space, they have bonus overages.  The bonus cushion is also removed so it limits who they can recall. 

 

Teams who have avoided LTIR are banking cap space.  It allows them to exceed the cap for the rest of the season.  I explained it higher up.  Why penalise those teams.  You really want to cancel the TDL and prevent teams from trading their expiring UFAs?  Can't imagine non playoffs teams being too happy about that.

 

Brisesbois traded Callahan's 5.8M LTIR contract and took back Mike Condon's 2.4M contract - he buried him in the minors for a residual cap hit of over 1.3M.  Condon was never recalled to the NHL.  By avoiding LTIR it allowed Tampa to bank cap space to add at the deadline although they had over 1.3M in dead cap.

 

 

 

Right now, the player on LTIR's cap hit is still counted against the team.  It basically eliminates the ability for the team to bank cap space unless they're under the cap WITH the guy on LTIR.

 

If instead, a player goes on LTIR, the team can replace him with another player, but the cap hit of the player on LTIR doesn't impact the cap, but instead, the player replacing him does. 

 

So let's do an example:

 

Upper cap limit is $80M

Canucks have an overall cap hit of $78M

Canucks player X is injured and goes to LTIR (he has a cap hit of $5M).

Canucks cap space is now $7M ($80 - $78 + $5)

Canucks can now replace injured Player X with Player Y

 

HOWEVER, make it such that accrual of cap space is based on the total cap for the team that includes the greater of: 

1. Cap hit of Player X that went on LTIR, or

2. Cap hit of Player Y

 

And of course, make it so that the cap hit remains intact for the playoffs based on the roster that is iced.  For example, if Player X doesn't come back until the playoffs, they can still keep Player X and Player Y, but they would need to decide who they want to ice for the game.

 

In essence, having a player go on LTIR has no impact on cap space accrual, but it also means you can't exceed the upper cap limit come playoff time.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would promote even more activity at the TDL.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2022 by HKSR

[mll]

9 hours ago, BPA said:

I’m confused.  Why would a cap during the playoffs be a bad thing?  

Teams can still make trades utilizing the LTIR.  The point of those trades (or should be) is to make the playoffs.  Once in the playoffs, they have choice of players so long as the team on the ice fits under the cap.

 

Why make a trade though if they can't put the player in the lineup.  No team is going to pay multiple assets for someone they then can't put in their lineup.  It's going to hurt non playoff teams who are trying to unload their UFAs.  

 

It also affects teams who aren't using LTIR.

 

Teams bank cap space throughout the season so they can make a trade at the TDL to add players they can't afford for the full season.   A couple of seasons ago, Vegas deliberately went into the season a few millions under the cap so they could bank cap space and improve their roster for the post-season.  By the deadline they added about 12M worth of contracts using banked cap space per Granger.  Their roster for the rest of the season obviously well exceeded the 81.5M cap although they were fully cap compliant to end the season.

 

Operating 1M under the cap allows to add a 5M player at the TDL, pushing the team above the cap but they are cap compliant over the season.  They wouldn't be in the post-season as their roster is now 85.5M.  

 

The vast majority of contenders are pretty close to the cap and don't start the season 5M under the cap.  If you put in a cap then the team trying to move that 5M player will be in tough to find a trade partner to gain assets.

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by mll

[mll]

9 hours ago, HKSR said:

 

Right now, the player on LTIR's cap hit is still counted against the team.  It basically eliminates the ability for the team to bank cap space unless they're under the cap WITH the guy on LTIR.

 

If instead, a player goes on LTIR, the team can replace him with another player, but the cap hit of the player on LTIR doesn't impact the cap, but instead, the player replacing him does. 

 

So let's do an example:

 

Upper cap limit is $80M

Canucks have an overall cap hit of $78M

Canucks player X is injured and goes to LTIR (he has a cap hit of $5M).

Canucks cap space is now $7M ($80 - $78 + $5)

Canucks can now replace injured Player X with Player Y

 

HOWEVER, make it such that accrual of cap space is based on the total cap for the team that includes the greater of: 

1. Cap hit of Player X that went on LTIR, or

2. Cap hit of Player Y

 

And of course, make it so that the cap hit remains intact for the playoffs based on the roster that is iced.  For example, if Player X doesn't come back until the playoffs, they can still keep Player X and Player Y, but they would need to decide who they want to ice for the game.

 

In essence, having a player go on LTIR has no impact on cap space accrual, but it also means you can't exceed the upper cap limit come playoff time.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this would promote even more activity at the TDL.

 

 

 

 

There are 2 types of LTIR.  Career ending and temporary.  Tampa had both on their roster - Kucherov + Gaborik/Nilsson.  Gaborik/Nilsson is not the issue.  It's the Patrick Kane situation of a few years ago, Kucherov situation and even what Vancouver did to add Toffoli that is being questioned by some.  

 

A team at the deadline puts a player on LTIR and can then add the equivalent cap hit to their roster through trade.  It's how Vancouver found the cap space to add Toffoli.  Once the bubble started they were above the cap as everyone came off LTIR including Ferland.  If it was the regular season they would have been in cap trouble.  

 

Say Vancouver was contending and Horvat was injured just before the TDL.  They could have put him on LTIR and added a 5.5M player as they are now allowed to exceed the cap by an additional 5.5M to replace Horvat.  Come the playoffs Horvat is back active - it puts them 5.5M above the cap as they've added that 5.5M player to replace him.

 

If on top of that you allow teams to bank cap space - they would be replacing their LTIR players + using banked cap space to add even more to their roster putting them even far more beyond the cap.

Cap space is calculated daily.  Every day a team is under 81.5M they can set that cap aside for future use.  At the end of the season the sum of all the daily cap hits cannot exceed 81.5M.  

 

For example 80% of the season up to the TDL at 80.5M + 20% of the remaining season post-TDL at after adding a 5M player to bring the daily cap to 85.5M is still 81.5M used.   80% x 80.5M + 20% x 85.5M = 81.5M.  The team is fully cap compliant and has never used LTIR.  

 

In LTIR they can't bank cap space because they are already exceeding the cap.  In LTIR there's no pro-rata as it only gives the cap space needed to remain cap compliant on the day.  

 

A 5M player goes on LTIR and assuming they maximised their relief they could exceed the cap up to 86.5M to replace that player.  Their active roster is still always below 81.5M as only the cap of the LTIR player can exceed the cap.  The upper cap is going to fluctuate based on their needs but will always be less than 86.5M.  So if their active roster is 78M that 5M will be covered 3.5M by regular cap and 1.5M by exceeding the cap putting their cap of the day at 83M.  If their active roster is 80M then the LTIR contract is covered 1.5M by regular cap and 3.5M by exceeding the cap which would put their cap of the day at 85M.  

 

There's no banked cap space because the team is exceeding the cap.  LTIR is only supposed to help a team replace an injured player.  So although those days the teams never used up the full 5M they had, they are forfeiting the difference.  If you allow them to bank cap space - then you are allowing teams to exceed the cap even more.  

 

 

[BPA]

43 minutes ago, mll said:

 

Why make a trade though if they can't put the player in the lineup.  No team is going to pay multiple assets for someone they then can't put in their lineup.  It's going to hurt non playoff teams who are trying to unload their UFAs.  

 

It also affects teams who aren't using LTIR.

 

Teams bank cap space throughout the season so they can make a trade at the TDL to add players they can't afford for the full season.   A couple of seasons ago, Vegas deliberately went into the season a few millions under the cap so they could bank cap space and improve their roster for the post-season.  By the deadline they added about 12M worth of contracts using banked cap space per Granger.  Their roster for the rest of the season obviously well exceeded the 81.5M cap although they were fully cap compliant to end the season.

 

Operating 1M under the cap allows to add a 5M player at the TDL, pushing the team above the cap but they are cap compliant over the season.  They wouldn't be in the post-season as their roster is now 85.5M.  

 

The vast majority of contenders are pretty close to the cap and don't start the season 5M under the cap.  If you put in a cap then the team trying to move that 5M player will be in tough to find a trade partner to gain assets.

 

Thanks for the clarification.

 

Then perhaps the rules need to be tweaked a bit cuz the status quo is not palatable to some.

 

Just like how they changed the icing calls, implemented the salary cap, limit contract length, etc.  Things change.

[HKSR]

9 hours ago, mll said:

 

 

There are 2 types of LTIR.  Career ending and temporary.  Tampa had both on their roster - Kucherov + Gaborik/Nilsson.  Gaborik/Nilsson is not the issue.  It's the Patrick Kane situation of a few years ago, Kucherov situation and even what Vancouver did to add Toffoli that is being questioned by some.  

 

A team at the deadline puts a player on LTIR and can then add the equivalent cap hit to their roster through trade.  It's how Vancouver found the cap space to add Toffoli.  Once the bubble started they were above the cap as everyone came off LTIR including Ferland.  If it was the regular season they would have been in cap trouble.  

 

Say Vancouver was contending and Horvat was injured just before the TDL.  They could have put him on LTIR and added a 5.5M player as they are now allowed to exceed the cap by an additional 5.5M to replace Horvat.  Come the playoffs Horvat is back active - it puts them 5.5M above the cap as they've added that 5.5M player to replace him.

 

If on top of that you allow teams to bank cap space - they would be replacing their LTIR players + using banked cap space to add even more to their roster putting them even far more beyond the cap.

Cap space is calculated daily.  Every day a team is under 81.5M they can set that cap aside for future use.  At the end of the season the sum of all the daily cap hits cannot exceed 81.5M.  

 

For example 80% of the season up to the TDL at 80.5M + 20% of the remaining season post-TDL at after adding a 5M player to bring the daily cap to 85.5M is still 81.5M used.   80% x 80.5M + 20% x 85.5M = 81.5M.  The team is fully cap compliant and has never used LTIR.  

 

In LTIR they can't bank cap space because they are already exceeding the cap.  In LTIR there's no pro-rata as it only gives the cap space needed to remain cap compliant on the day.  

 

A 5M player goes on LTIR and assuming they maximised their relief they could exceed the cap up to 86.5M to replace that player.  Their active roster is still always below 81.5M as only the cap of the LTIR player can exceed the cap.  The upper cap is going to fluctuate based on their needs but will always be less than 86.5M.  So if their active roster is 78M that 5M will be covered 3.5M by regular cap and 1.5M by exceeding the cap putting their cap of the day at 83M.  If their active roster is 80M then the LTIR contract is covered 1.5M by regular cap and 3.5M by exceeding the cap which would put their cap of the day at 85M.  

 

There's no banked cap space because the team is exceeding the cap.  LTIR is only supposed to help a team replace an injured player.  So although those days the teams never used up the full 5M they had, they are forfeiting the difference.  If you allow them to bank cap space - then you are allowing teams to exceed the cap even more.  

 

 

Which is fine.  The issue is when the player comes back from LTIR.  If they need to become cap compliant once that player comes back, nothing has changed.  The only difference is teams that utilize LTIR can still bank cap space and are not penalized for having a player get injured. 

 

So if a player gets injured now and goes on LTIR, they get penalized twice.  Once for the fact they now have to use LTIR and find a replacement player.  And again because it impacts their ability to bank cap space.

 

In my situation, they don't get penalized for it.  They simply are able to replace the player they lost to injury, and if they replace him with a lesser player for a long period of time, they bank more cap space to make up for it later.

 

However, they STILL need to be cap compliant once the playoff starts, so there's less incentive to abuse the system in the first place.

[mll]

17 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Which is fine.  The issue is when the player comes back from LTIR.  If they need to become cap compliant once that player comes back, nothing has changed.  The only difference is teams that utilize LTIR can still bank cap space and are not penalized for having a player get injured. 

 

So if a player gets injured now and goes on LTIR, they get penalized twice.  Once for the fact they now have to use LTIR and find a replacement player.  And again because it impacts their ability to bank cap space.

 

In my situation, they don't get penalized for it.  They simply are able to replace the player they lost to injury, and if they replace him with a lesser player for a long period of time, they bank more cap space to make up for it later.

 

However, they STILL need to be cap compliant once the playoff starts, so there's less incentive to abuse the system in the first place.

You are giving them double benefit by creating additional cap space.  It's unfair to teams who never went on LTIR because they too will then have to be cap compliant.  Also if teams have to be cap compliant in the post-season they the trade costs are going to plummet.  Why would teams pay much for players who they might have to sit out.  

Really can't see how it's going to solve any of the issues.  At the end of the day it does feel like this whole issue is overblown - quite a few in media already have such a hard time understanding LTIR and there's this belief that it's an advantage when it hardly ever is.  Maybe Vegas missing the playoffs is going to get people to realise that it's really not the best way to try and get around the cap.  

[HKSR]

7 minutes ago, mll said:

You are giving them double benefit by creating additional cap space.  It's unfair to teams who never went on LTIR because they too will then have to be cap compliant.  Also if teams have to be cap compliant in the post-season they the trade costs are going to plummet.  Why would teams pay much for players who they might have to sit out.  

Really can't see how it's going to solve any of the issues.  At the end of the day it does feel like this whole issue is overblown - quite a few in media already have such a hard time understanding LTIR and there's this belief that it's an advantage when it hardly ever is.  Maybe Vegas missing the playoffs is going to get people to realise that it's really not the best way to try and get around the cap.  

For a team that gets a key loss, they should have some kind of benefit vs a team that has no injuries.  Would the Canucks benefit if Miller or Pettersson gets hurt just so they can bank some extra cap space?  And it's not like they can bank more than before either because in my scenario, the cap hit applied is the greater of the injured player's cap hit or the replacement. 

 

I think players acquired at the TDL should have a pro-rata effect on the cap for the playoffs.  Something like 20% of a player's cap hit will be applied to a team acquiring a player at the TDL.  That same application should continue into the playoffs, but the cap limit should still be intact.  So if a team has $2M in cap space at the TDL, they could add $10M worth of players that could play in the playoffs.  Rentals would be worth a fortune, which is ideal for teams that are rebuilding. 

[mll]

12 minutes ago, HKSR said:

For a team that gets a key loss, they should have some kind of benefit vs a team that has no injuries.  Would the Canucks benefit if Miller or Pettersson gets hurt just so they can bank some extra cap space?  And it's not like they can bank more than before either because in my scenario, the cap hit applied is the greater of the injured player's cap hit or the replacement. 

 

I think players acquired at the TDL should have a pro-rata effect on the cap for the playoffs.  Something like 20% of a player's cap hit will be applied to a team acquiring a player at the TDL.  That same application should continue into the playoffs, but the cap limit should still be intact.  So if a team has $2M in cap space at the TDL, they could add $10M worth of players that could play in the playoffs.  Rentals would be worth a fortune, which is ideal for teams that are rebuilding. 

Why would a team be allowed to spend more than 81.5M.  It doesn't solve the issue to allow teams to spend more than they should.

 

Another problem is that it's going to also impact escrow.  If you are giving teams more cap space than the 81.5M - then you are asking players to give up more of their salaries to make up for the difference to 50% of HRR (hockey related revenue).  They've introduced a formula to limit escrow and have the cap tied more accurately to HRR.

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by mll

[HKSR]

1 minute ago, mll said:

Why would a team be allowed to spend more than 81.5M.  You are trying to create cap space instead of solving the issue.  

 

Another problem is that it's going to also impact escrow.  If you are giving teams more cap space than the 81.5M - then you are asking players to give up more of their salaries to make up for the difference to 50% of HRR (hockey related revenue).  They've introduced a formula to limit escrow and have the cap tied more accurately to HRR.

 

They're not spending more than $81.5M.  That's still the cap limit.

 

When a player gets put on LTIR, their cap is removed while on LTIR so that they can be replaced.  However, it's upto the team on what they want to do:

1.  Find a full blown replacement (ie. a $5M player for a $5M player) and worry about trying to be cap compliant later; or

2.  Find a replacement in the system (which is what most teams would do), where finding a replacement in the system means the team will likely bank more cap space for later, so as they struggle without that key player in the lineup, they can make up for it by acquiring more help later.

 

That's completely fair in my mind. 

[Vinny in Vancouver]

It's too bad the Dadonov trade didn't go through. He has been producing for Vegas. 

[DeNiro]

2 minutes ago, Vinny in Vancouver said:

It's too bad the Dadonov trade didn't go through. He has been producing for Vegas. 

The league found a way for the Knights to keep him though and activate all their injured players without trading anybody.

 

A miracle I tell ya!

[mll]

11 hours ago, HKSR said:

They're not spending more than $81.5M.  That's still the cap limit.

 

When a player gets put on LTIR, their cap is removed while on LTIR so that they can be replaced.  However, it's upto the team on what they want to do:

1.  Find a full blown replacement (ie. a $5M player for a $5M player) and worry about trying to be cap compliant later; or

2.  Find a replacement in the system (which is what most teams would do), where finding a replacement in the system means the team will likely bank more cap space for later, so as they struggle without that key player in the lineup, they can make up for it by acquiring more help later.

 

That's completely fair in my mind. 

The cap hit isn't removed but gets added.  LTIR already allows you to replace a 5M player with a 5M player - why do you want to give those teams even more cap space than that.  

[HKSR]

8 hours ago, mll said:

The cap hit isn't removed but gets added.  LTIR already allows you to replace a 5M player with a 5M player - why do you want to give those teams even more cap space than that.  

Because of the inevitable issue of a cap in the playoffs.  Allowing teams that face key injuries to bank cap space for later gives them an opportunity to upgrade for the playoff run.  

[mll]

3 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Because of the inevitable issue of a cap in the playoffs.  Allowing teams that face key injuries to bank cap space for later gives them an opportunity to upgrade for the playoff run.  

The complaint is that teams are putting players on LTIR so that they can add for the playoff run.  You are making the issue considerably worse.  

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, mll said:

The complaint is that teams are putting players on LTIR so that they can add for the playoff run.  You are making the issue considerably worse.  

@mll

When team use LTIR to spend over the cap does that extra get calculated into the owner’s share of spending HRR?  (Is that a 50/50 split?). 

If it’s not, then the players’ union would want teams spending extra, no?  

[HKSR]

59 minutes ago, mll said:

The complaint is that teams are putting players on LTIR so that they can add for the playoff run.  You are making the issue considerably worse.  

How? There's no cap for the playoffs right now.  My scenario has one.

 

My scenario helps teams who face key injuries get to the big dance, but once there, they face the same limits as everybody else.  Way more fair than it is now.

 

Edited April 21, 2022 by HKSR

[mll]

29 minutes ago, Alflives said:

@mll

When team use LTIR to spend over the cap does that extra get calculated into the owner’s share of spending HRR?  (Is that a 50/50 split?). 

If it’s not, then the players’ union would want teams spending extra, no?  

People are complaining about Kucherov or how Vegas have been putting those players on LTIR - that proposal would give them even more cap space.  It amplifies the issue. 

 

No guarantee but I would guess that players on LTIR are part of the 50/50.  There would be too much manipulation otherwise - Larkin is out of the rest of the season and Detroit is keeping him on IR as they have ample cap space.  Imagine if on LTIR he could skip contributing to escrow.  Can't see how it would not be considered part of the players' share.

 

There's not really an owners' share to spending.  HRR is simply the sum of all revenues and it gets split in half.   Out of the players' 50% share comes their salaries, buyouts etc.  When the players get more than 50% of HRR they have to contribute to escrow to refund what they've received in excess.  I don't see how LTIR players could be treated differently.