View Single Post
Old
01-08-2013, 09:33 PM
  #17
AgentM
Registered User
 
AgentM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Allison Park, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tender Rip View Post
Yeah, that's going to be insane .
But no more Jordan Staal trades, that takes away 40% of the material on there!

Quote:
One little wrinkle here, but as I read the rules, it could also some times play in the opposite direction.
Take Redden as an example. Rangers just sent him down and kept that mistake off the NHL roster, thus suffering no cap consequences.
With this rule, say they had found someone to take him while paying some of the salary. That cap-hit they would have to take and the impact would be like buying him out, just cheaper. As the economic benefit of trading the player is so significant compared to retaining all the costs, even the most deep pocketed teams will likely do this.

Also, if Vancouver wants to get out from under Luongo for instance, and take on some salary/caphit, that will improve the return they get on Luongo, but it also takes away some of their cap-room.
In KIRK's Calgary example, that's not an issue for Calgary as they would be going nowhere in the short term anyway, but for Vancouver having (say) two million less in cap-space next season (and a long time into the future), that would be an issue for a contender.

But it surely will open some very interesting scenarios.
Good points. And I'm sure GM's have already thought of other loopholes and ways to abuse this that we haven't!

AgentM is offline   Reply With Quote