View Single Post
11-08-2012, 03:00 PM
Registered User
Zip15's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 18,258
vCash: 326
Originally Posted by Zman5778 View Post
While I understand the rationale both ways, I think that it might be more prudent to use the amnesty on Leino.

If the cap really does go down into the $55 million range, then we're talking about Leino's deal taking up 8% of the cap, and I'm not sure he's worth that much, even when he's playing well.

Under a $70 million cap, then he's probably worth the $4.5 mil per cap hit.

Yeah, I'm assuming a one-time, use-it-or-lose-it clause that wipes the cap hit from the books completely.
I think you're also assuming that teams wouldn't be permitted to slowly make their way back to the cap and be a certain amount over the cap in the first year or two of the deal--something Bettman has stated would be likely under a reduced cap.

I'm all for amestying some point that isn't now. I think you have to give him more than one season to prove himself--say nothing for deploying him correctly (he's not a center!) and putting him in positions to succeed (give him some PP time). A ridiculously high percentage of players underperform in their first season with a new team. And, as I stated in the other thread, I suppose we don't care about wasting $15m-$20m of Pegula's money for only one season, but I'm guessing Pegula (and Darcy and Ted) do care, and that's why I doubt it'd happen immediately.

(I'm assuming the teams will have an option to do it at some point during the life of the CBA, and it won't be an immediate, use-it-or-lose-it proposition.)

Zip15 is offline   Reply With Quote